Pangloss Posted August 16, 2006 Author Share Posted August 16, 2006 I'll even add another one to your side of the scale: Hezbollah got a lot of PR yesterday when it announced that it would help pay for, and assist with, the rebuilding efforts. But I still think that POV misses certain key points, such as increased world attention and the destruction of open Hezbollah outposts next to the Israeli border. This also constitutes another "starting point", and so just as Hezbollah was condemned by the international community for starting this conflict, they'll be condemned even more strongly next time. Those condemnations have limited effect, to be sure, but it's better than not having them. Internationally, at the very *least* people see the present conflict as "both sides were wrong", and few think that Hezbollah's actions were justified by Israel's. That's more progress than we've seen in the whole two years since Syria pulled out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Severian Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 So yes' date=' if they are successful in removing Hezbollah from power, in recognizing the dangerous of supporting violent terrorists, and in achieving peaceful coexistence with their neighbors, then I think this will eventually be a positive step for Lebanon. How can it not be?[/quote'] Here are some IMF figures: It seems clear that the destruction of southern Lebanon and half of Beruit will radically change this picture. So the recent war has not only killed 1,100 Lebanese civilians (and for that matter 43 Israeli civilians) but will send thousands more into poverty. How can that be positive for Israel? A poor downtrodden population will be a lot easier for Hezbollah to exploit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
budullewraagh Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 I'll even add another one to your side of the scale: Hezbollah got a lot of PR yesterday when it announced that it would help pay for, and assist with, the rebuilding efforts. Didn't I cite that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooeypoo Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 You're right Severian, this hurts the Lebanese economy dearly. It also hurts Israeli Economy dearly - since the northern cities rely mostly on tourism (Christian pilgrims coming to the "holy sites" of nazareth, Sea of Galilee and more) and some agriculture fields (which mostly were burnt in fires from the missiles). Both economies were badly damaged, and it's now time to fix them :\ I would say, though, that in the long term, the disarmament of Hizbullah will benefit both sides economy and general population, so even though the damage to both sides was extensive, I would at least hope that we will see much bigger climbs in the next few years than would've been possible during continuous missiles Hizbullah has been firing and Israel military's attempt to stop them for the past six years. Perhaps the two states can finally cooperate in order to bring a dramatic change in the entire region. That, however, will have to be accopmanied by Lebanon's will to stop cooperating with Syrian military and Iranian army guard. ~moo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bettina Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 Hezbollah will never disarm. The type of rockets it used to start the conflict in the first place will be replaced by even longer range types with bigger grenades attached to them and they will get them for free from Syria and Iran. No amount of good will from Israel, now, in the past, or in the future, will stop the next war by states who wish to end (and openly state that) Israels existance....period. Israel is what will eventually happen to all civilized states/countries if we let terrorism win so, unlike some posters here, I will state again that Hezbollah didn't win anything that they didn't already have and Israel just bought itself some time by pushing those small rockets farther back. What is needed is a very strong U.N. composed of a very strong mulitnational force who has the power to investigate and place blame on the group who starts the fighting. Something that will never happen. If I was Israel, I would get ready to defend itself again and soon. Bee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tetrahedrite Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 Bettina, There is a diference between you not wanting to admit that Hezbollah gained something, and reality. It is quite clear (even from those who believe Israel came out on top in this conflict) that both Israel and Hezbollah have mutually advanced their causes, at least in some small way. Flat out denying it won't make it true. On a seperate note, I think the real losers here are the Lebanese people who do not support Hezbollah. Their economy and infrastructure has been destroyed, many have lost their homes, and some have even lost their lives. All because they live in a democracy that allows groups like hezbollah to be voted into their government, which in the eyes of Israel makes their whole country a legitimate target. A real shame for those people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooeypoo Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 Tetrahedrite, I agree with you, but I think that just as both sides 'gained something' (it's quite hard to say that in light of all the deaths), both sides also lost a lot. Israel got way over its head; it may have gained pushing the Hizbullah back away from the borders and lowering its abilities to hurt Israeli citizen, and showed that Hizbullah gets ACTIVE help from Iran (like seen here), but it did not severely mamed the Hizbullah, and its economical state - specifically in the north parts of the state - will be a very hard thing to fix, and will take a long long time for both sides. Lebanon gained in the effect that the Hizbullah now is weakenned and the Lebanese army can now have a more secure control over its land. Also, showing the support the Hizbullah got from Iran and Syria will help deminish those forces (with the world's help) from Lebanon's territory, and the lebanese people (from their own testimony) would love to see that happen. It lost in terms of economy and infrastructure (reffer to the same link I gave with Israel), a situation that will take a long while to fix aswell. The Hizbullah might have won the polls of the world (as we have seen in some sections of this forum aswell), and has regained the love and appreciation and economical help from Syria and Iran, and the fact that it was not disarmed, but it did lose its ability to fully control the territory, and some of its "glory" among the citizen of Lebanon. So realistically speaking, all sides "won and lost". Notice that I didn't mention "both" sides in this conflict. There are no two sides, there are THREE. The hizbullah is seperate from Lebanon. It didn't appear to be at some point during the deliberations on the ceasefire, but it is. Hizbullah's goals are not (and shouldn't be) the same as Lebanon's goals. We should really mention Lebanon as a country aswell, and not include it inside the Hizbullah's side. ~moo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 If the Lebanese people allow themselves to be duped and/or bought off again with Iranian oil money, they will be the losers every time. Israel gained (i) because they changed the calculation somewhat the next time Hezbollah and/or Iran consider a mission to grab a couple of Israeli soldiers as bargaining chips, (ii) they may have degraded Hezbollah's capabilities albeit only temporarily and (iii) they put the world on notice that this problem is not going away and requires concerted international effort. For Hezbollah, their capabilities were temporarily degraded but the long term impact is hard to predict. On the one hand, they can certainly benefit from the anti-Israel sentiment of the day; on the other, the world is now watching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooeypoo Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 Israel gained (i) because they changed the calculation somewhat the next time Hezbollah and/or Iran consider a mission to grab a couple of Israeli soldiers as bargaining chips, (ii) they may have degraded Hezbollah's capabilities albeit only temporarily and (iii) they put the world on notice that this problem is not going away and requires concerted international effort. Jim, I'd agree with you, if only Hizbullah gave a damn about people's lives.. But about the world knowing, well.. I hope you're right. I hope this actually did raise the awareness to the Hizbullah's threat along with Iran/Syria cooperation. ~moo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr d Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 hello as i said in another thread. main winner hezbollah. no not a millitary victory. but when you opponent states they will destroy you and you means to wage war. and at the 'present' end your still there, and still able to carry out operations you won. won what may be another matter. their main victory however was the propaganda war. at first moderate arabs did not support hezbollah, but due to the intensity of isreali's attack and the high death toll of civilians many did come to support them. viewing isreal and the western nation, mainly the u.s. that supports isreal as the aggressors. during the peak of the war the shi'ite muslim and christian lebanese in came out in their paper supporting the sunni hezbollah which has not happen before. isreal gains a victory of time. hezbollah needs time to rebuild and rearm, as does isreal. hopefully they'll find some other means of displaying their differences in the time bought. the shear numbers of rockets launched by hezbollah demonstrates they were building up supplies. yet it seems isreal was caught off guard by that build up, meaning they need to recheck intelligence gathering. if they knew about the build up of rockets they should have had a better understand of their location and been able to conduct operations to destroy ordinance depots before the missle could be used. also shows a better understanding needs to be developed as how current technology can be used by a more poorly financed faction like hezbollah to offset weapons superiority of isreal. very bad that isreal could be percieved a vunerable because of this. winner iran. got to test there new toys in war condictions, and stood up to both isreal and the u.s. in their open support of hezbollah. inhances their stance as a leading islamic country. losers the lebanese people. weren't looking for a war, didn't want one, but suffered the brunt of the isreali incursion. the isreali inhabitants of northern isreal. same sort of reason but replace with hezbollah and rocket attacks. the u.n. shows their of little effectiveness, though it is hoped they can somehow now manage to bring peace to the region with support from the lebanese army. but that's not what they were designed for (see movie hotel rwanda for reference). the u.s. if there was any good will left amoung muslims it's about dead. saying you support isreal but how you don't want to be involved, then get caught sending shipments of those wonderful laser guided bombs that where shortly there after dropped on the lebanese kinda makes it had to believe you. the rest of us. open the gates, plenty of new recruits to join the ranks of terroists already out there. plus as we can see by the greater knowledge used in bombs in iraq, the new toys provided by the iranians in lebanon, and the creative liquid explosives planned to be used in britian; many of the newer individuals joining bring many wonderful new talents to the table. mr d Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tetrahedrite Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 Mooeypoo, I agree with most of what you say, I was responding to Bettina's comment that "Hezbollah didn't win anything that they didn't already have", which IMO is simply not true. I definitely agree that both sies lost a lot, but I also think there is a big difference in what each side lost. And once again please don't assume criticism of Israel = support for Hezbollah, because this is simply not the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooeypoo Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 I don't assume criticism in Israel, I think you are completely right. And Israel is critisizing itself, btw. Good. Though I still believe this war was a no-choice war, there were flaws. Now is the time for investigations, and it is exactly what Israel is doing.. That said, I am also realistic - while everyone lost is a true statement, there is no doubt that relatively speaking, Israel probably lost the least, since it was (and is) the powerful side. I just hope that for the FUTURE this venture will bring better times and will prove to bring more good than bad at the long run. ~moo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bettina Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 Mooeypoo' date=' I agree with most of what you say, I was responding to Bettina's comment that "Hezbollah didn't win anything that they didn't already have", which IMO is simply not true. I definitely agree that both sies lost a lot, but I also think there is a big difference in what each side lost. And once again please don't assume criticism of Israel = support for Hezbollah, because this is simply not the case.[/quote'] I look at "winning" as a good thing. Winning the lotto, winning free gas, winning the senior pagent. Winning, by starting a war and destroying the country you live in because you chose to hide among civilians is not winning. Hezbollah already had the undying support from their friends Iran, Syria, and every other terrorist group already, so what did they "win". I just don't see it. Israel, like I said, gained monitors on their border. Much stronger than they had before, and thats a good thing. Sorry we don't agree.... Bee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooeypoo Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 Winning' date=' by starting a war and destroying the country you live in because you chose to hide among civilians is not winning.[/quote'] You're right, but that's Lebanon's loss. Hizbullah doesn't give a crap about civilians, so it's not concidering it a loss. And since their goal was the distruction of Israel, they see this as a battle they've won: Israel was threatenning to destroy them, and despite all its might, it didn't. This actually (and unfortunately for all of us) is a noticeable "win" - their desire to fight is stronger, and their "patriotism" to their goal (i am not sure I know a different more suitable word, so feel free to suggest a better one) went up the scale. That =is= bad. It means they're more determined.. They concider themselves winners, and they don't care about the Lebanese lives. ~moo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangloss Posted August 17, 2006 Author Share Posted August 17, 2006 Some really great points being made in this thread. I think this is one of the more interesting discussions we've had lately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 the u.s. if there was any good will left amoung muslims it's about dead. That is quite a sweeping statement. I believe that the Muslim 1% of the US population still has some good will towards America even if they disagree with elements of her current foreign policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john5746 Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 You're right' date=' but that's Lebanon's loss. Hizbullah doesn't give a crap about civilians, so it's not concidering it a loss. And since their goal was the distruction of Israel, they see this as a battle they've won: Israel was threatenning to destroy them, and despite all its might, it didn't. ~moo[/quote'] Isn't Hezbullah more than a terrorist group in practice? I have heard that any humanitarian relief goes through them to the Lebanese. They look like the Red Cross to these people. I don't like the KKK, but if someone bombs my house and I see these guys fighting said bombers and giving me aide, they start looking a little better. I will hate them later, but while I am trying to survive, I will use their help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecoli Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 Isn't Hezbullah more than a terrorist group in practice? I have heard that any humanitarian relief goes through them to the Lebanese. They look like the Red Cross to these people. I don't like the KKK, but if someone bombs my house and I see these guys fighting said bombers and giving me aide, they start looking a little better. I will hate them later, but while I am trying to survive, I will use their help. It's a convienent way for Hezbollah to feed civilians propaganda about Israel and the 'west'. Hopefully, that should change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Severian Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 It's a convienent way for Hezbollah to feed civilians propaganda about Israel and the 'west'. Hopefully' date=' that should change.[/quote'] Which bit do you want to change? That the people in southern Lebanon are getting aid, or that the aid is going through Hezbollah? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bettina Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 It's a convienent way for Hezbollah to feed civilians propaganda about Israel and the 'west'. Hopefully, that should change. A real life Jekyll and Hyde. A terrorist by any other name is a .... Bee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr d Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 hello in a above post wrote the sunni hezbollah. should have remembered they are shi'ite. if your back by iran your shi'ite, if by saudia arabia and egypt (also formally iraq) your sunni. heard on the radio this morning that hezbollah already has their bulldozers out clearing rubble in their areas, and are bringing in relief supplies. winning hearts in the south, through some lebonese in the north are stating resentment for hezbollah dragging them into a war. also has any one heard more on a story that was briefly on bbc radio of a high ranking isreali military commander caught trading stocks right after attending meetings on isreali's responce to the original kidnapping of the soldiers. perhaps their learning even more things from the americans than we suspected. mr d Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooeypoo Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 Isn't Hezbullah more than a terrorist group in practice? I have heard that any humanitarian relief goes through them to the Lebanese. They look like the Red Cross to these people. They're a very good P-R'ed Terrorist Organization. They are not ACTIVELY doing anything for the people, but they twist it so that the people next to them think they're the source of all good. ~moo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
budullewraagh Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 I'd like to know why you have any reason to believe that Hezbollah is doing anything less their best to help the Lebanese people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saryctos Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 It's like an organized crime group extorting goods and services from one neighborhood, while providing the jobless in another neighborhood with a way to earn money by doing it for them. The group would be seen as helpful by those who beneffit from them, but it doesn't change the fact that they're doing something wrong. Another example, group of guys start selling meth, and decide they make enough money that someone else can make it for them. They hire people to take their stuff and do the processing. People who get paid when were previously jobless are darn happy, so are their families. Don't read too much into the allagies, just realize the main points within them. I do illegal things that piss off group A, and that makes group B happy, should I be held accountable for what I do to group A? Should my good deeds for group B detract from my malice to group A? Is group B somehow responsible for influincing my continual actions against group A by creating a market for my tainted goods? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bettina Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 I'd like to know why you have any reason to believe that Hezbollah is doing anything less their best to help the Lebanese people. How about starting a war with Israel. Or how about hiding among its civilians when shooting rockets knowing they will be targeted. How about not giving back the captured soldiers instead of watching their country get smashed to bits. That kind of nulifies the goodness they show now. Bettina Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts