Life and Death Lessons from Lebanon

[NewsGuy]

Life and Death Lessons from Lebanon

Israel’s uneasy relationship with its neighbor, Lebanon, spans decades and is marked by violence, subterfuge and a bloody battle against Arab terrorism. Like the ongoing Palestinian war forced upon Israel, the Lebanese conflict drones on and on, fueled by Islamic terrorism, as well as by the pan-Arab desire to mass-murder all Israelis living in the Jewish homeland.

The central figures in the conflict include the world’s most malicious terror-sponsoring states of Iran and Syria. The Lebanese-based Islamic murder organization Hizbullah is described by U.S. defense officials as being on par with al Qaeda on the ‘A’ List of global terrorism, armed and trained by Iran and Syria. In addition to continuously firing missiles into Israeli civilian population centers, Hizbullah has massacred dozens of American soldiers and civilians, and is regarded as a future target of the U.S. war on terrorism. And awkwardly sitting on the sidelines is the Lebanese government -- a powerless puppet of Syria, which controls Lebanon with an iron fist. Rounding out the picture is Israel in the dual role of both victim and culprit, according to many observers.

Israel in the role of victim is plain to see: While Syria, Iran and Hizbullah openly call for the genocide of Israeli civilians, the Arabs’ missiles rain down regularly on Israeli towns, creating a situation that is clearly intolerable. One can imagine, for example, what the reaction of the U.S. or Britain would be if Iran shot missiles into downtown Chicago, or into London…

But Israel in the role of culprit is a more complicated matter. While Ariel Sharon was forced to create a security zone in Lebanon in the 80s, Barak’s shameful midnight retreat opened the door to a new understanding among Israel’s Arab enemies. Indeed, the Arabs and Iranians came to view Israel as a weak, fractured society capable of being driven to defeat by Islamic terrorism.

Similarly, Israel’s military restraint and reluctance to achieve a decisive victory against Hizbullah and Lebanon’s collectively guilty Shi’ite population caused the Arabs to view Israel’s hands as being bound by the shackles of Europe’s Arab allies. So much so, in fact, that Israel’s perceived weakness was exploited by the Palestinians who began their second intifada (terrorism campaign) against Israel immediately after Barak’s Lebanese rout.

But among the lessons that Israel needs to internalize in the event of another Lebanese war, is that the true centers of terrorism must be attacked, in addition to Hizbullah. From the civilian and military infrastructures of Lebanon, Damascus and Teheran, Israel must wreak havoc in accordance with the successful American devastation of the Taliban regime.

And while the current water crisis looms as a “casus belli” (provocation for war) over the Mideast, this latest Arab assault on Israeli civilian infrastructure, is merely a continuation of its decades-old racist vendetta against the Jewish people of Israel.

* * *

Do you agree?

[L@mplighterM]

It’s scary that the Shi’ite and Sunni Muslims that have traditionally been enemies (as far as I know) are now forming alliances against what the see as their common enemy namely Israel.

I know that the Hizbullah is known to be Lebanese based but I don’t believe that’s totally correct. I think that the various terrorist organizations are fluid and their names might as well be interchangeable because it’s certain that they share logistics and other information. There’s undoubtedly unhindered free passage through neighboring Arab States. I don’t think there’s anyone checking passports to closely at their borders.

The thought had crossed my mind that Iraq through the Hizbullah was behind the diversion of water scheme in Lebanon in an attempt to draw Israel into a conflict with Lebanon. This would certainly rally support for Iraq from the rest of Islam because Arab/Muslim countries seem to have an unwritten treaty that makes them support each other. Of course this treaty doesn’t mean much when they are killing each other and for the main part it’s mostly only moral support.

There’s some indication that the US war with Iraq will not fly because that country today opened the door to unconditional inspections http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/...er/index.html.

Time will tell where this turn of events will lead. I have always hoped that Iraq would get it but there will not be much support for this action now.

Perhaps if the war against Iraq becomes a no go the US could target Syria next and with good cause.

[Philip]

What you are clearly doing, NewsGuy, is sending up a trial balloon for a "justification" for Israeli aggression against Lebanon. I particularly liked your dropping of the phrase, "collectively guilty Shi’ite population" -- as in, "when we start slaughtering them, it will be because they are guilty, collectively." (Never mind the Geneva Convention.)

Also, if the "current water crisis" (by which I assume you mean the accusation by Sharon that Lebanon is diverting the flow of one of the tributaries of the Jordan) is a casus belli, and "a continuation of its decades-old racist vendetta against the Jewish people of Israel," then can we also say that the diversion of much of the Jordan River into the National Water Carrier (and thus, out of reach for Jordan and the West Bank) in the early 1960s was also a casus belli, and perhaps even a racist vendetta by the Jewish people of Israel against their non-Jewish neighbors? No, of course we can't say that!

No, I don't agree, NewsGuy. Your phoniness is too transparent. But you might get away with it anyway among people who aren't really paying attention, which is proabably as much as you want.

[Mediocrates]

Even Arab states agree that water is a pan regional problem and not a case of 'those damn Jews.'

Any unilateral action should be met with resistance, eh? I mean isn't this world where we are all supposed to share?

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by Philip
What you are clearly doing, NewsGuy, is sending up a trial balloon for a "justification" for Israeli aggression against Lebanon.

No, Arab missiles being shot into Israeli population centers daily by the Hizbullah have created the necessity to eliminate that menace.

And the racist Islamic vendetta against the Jewish people and against Christians for that matter, is the reason for the missiles and the current water crisis that will very possibly lead to yet another Arab-initiated Mideast war.

Also, if the "current water crisis" (by which I assume you mean the accusation by Sharon that Lebanon is diverting the flow of one of the tributaries of the Jordan)

ok, let's stop you right here. You say, "Accusation by Sharon???" I can see that you are already hard at work setting up the next vicious lie that is to say that there is no diversion of water, but rather that it is an Israeli fabrication...

can we also say that the diversion of much of the Jordan River into the National Water Carrier (and thus, out of reach for Jordan and the West Bank) in the early 1960s was also a casus belli, and perhaps even a racist vendetta by the Jewish people of Israel against their non-Jewish neighbors? No, of course we can't say that!

Yes, you can say that, but as usual, you'd be wrong.

Here are some facts:

"1. Jordan relies on the surface waters of the basin for 75% of its water needs, while Israel relies on the surface waters for only 30% of its water consumption.

2. Israel supplies Palestinians with 63 percent of the total water consumed in the West Bank via Mekerot pipelines.

3. South of the Sea of Galilee, the Jordan meets the Yarmouk River, which contributes between 400 and 450 MCM of water to the basin. Syria is constantly constructing storage reservoirs on the Yarmouk, which directly reduce the discharge of the river remaining for Jordan and Israel."

Source: Princeton University

Based on this, it looks like the Arabs and their apologists have nothing much to complain about. Israel is the one that needs to be worried and not allow for any more diversion of its natural resources by its Arab enemies.

No, I don't agree, NewsGuy. Your phoniness is too transparent.

In the future, don't come to me to complain about being "persecuted" for your ideas. It is your nastiness and repeated violation of the rules of this forum against personal attacks that will be the reason for your "departure."

[Philip]

Originally posted by NewsGuy
ok, let's stop you right here. You say, "Accusation by Sharon???" I can see that you are already hard at work setting up the next vicious lie that is to say that there is no diversion of water, but rather that it is an Israeli fabrication...

If you bothered to follow the news, you might find that the Lebanese have been falling all over themselves to make clear that they were addressing a short-term drought problem faced by one village.

Yes, you can say that, but as usual, you'd be wrong.

Here are some facts:

"1. Jordan relies on the surface waters of the basin for 75% of its water needs, while Israel relies on the surface waters for only 30% of its water consumption.

Irrelevant. What are the absolute amounts, and, more importantly, how much has Israel's use of Jordan River water gone up relative to Jordan's use since the NWC was constructed?

2. Israel supplies Palestinians with 63 percent of the total water consumed in the West Bank via Mekerot pipelines.

So after taking what the West Bank Palestinians would otherwise have been able to get on their own, Israel is now providing them with a fraction of that total, subject to Israel's whims? Some favor!

3. South of the Sea of Galilee, the Jordan meets the Yarmouk River, which contributes between 400 and 450 MCM of water to the basin. Syria is constantly constructing storage reservoirs on the Yarmouk, which directly reduce the discharge of the river remaining for Jordan and Israel."

Yep. And whenever Israel feels bothered by it, Israel bombs Syria's construction, showing that Israel understands the problem of unilateral diversion of water, at least when other nations do it.

Based on this, it looks like the Arabs and their apologists have nothing much to complain about. Israel is the one that needs to be worried and not allow for any more diversion of its natural resources by its Arab enemies.

What a surprise that you would come to this conclusion. How about the fact that the West Bank Palestinians have essentially been completely banned by Israel from drilling any new wells, while their illegal settler neighbors drill to their hearts' content? Why not just say what you really think, NewsGuy -- that these are unclean Gentiles in the Land of Israel, and as such they have no right to natural resources there, and, when you get down to it, they have no right even to be there?

In the future, don't come to me to complain about being "persecuted" for your ideas. It is your nastiness and repeated violation of the rules of this forum against personal attacks that will be the reason for your "departure."

Inasmuch as you won't even stop minusthejihad from making threats that are perilously close to causing me to alert the FBI, you can rest assured that I have no expectation that there is any point in complaining to you about anything.

[minusthejihad]

Ha! You've got to be kidding me. Please call the FBI.

They'll find out that I'm a 27 year old Web Developer that functions perfectly within the confines of the law, without a blemish on my personal, career, collegiate, or criminal records. They'll also find out that I try to monitor Hate Groups and anti-semetic potential threats like you and have no qualms about "stepping up to the plate" as you say to shove the filfth you spew right down your throat if you come into my personal space. Is that clear?

[Mediocrates]

Philip - which part of this is a regional problem was vague? Syria and Iraq both have more supply than demand. If they wanted to sell it to Israel they would. This problem could have been solved years ago but apparently water and thirst is just another weapon in the Arab arsenal even if it means their own drought.

Israel is going to the next country who will sell them water, Turkey. But since Syria sits between them Turkey and Israel will have to figure out some other way to move the water; possibly by constructing a pipeline through the Mediterranean but that has not been determined yet.

What will eventually happen is that one way another either through technology or through purchase contracts with other countries Israel will solve their water problems. If their Arab neighbors want to be left out of the loop to make a political point I guess that's their perogative. It will remain their problem to solve on their own.

[Mehmet III]

Syria and Iraq both have more supply than demand. If they wanted to sell it to Israel they would. This problem could have been solved years ago but apparently water and thirst is just another weapon in the Arab arsenal even if it means their own drought.

Iraq, under current sanctions, could not sell it even if they wanted to. Syria would not because of the political situation in Golan Heights which Israel took from them during wartime.

[Mediocrates]

Such polemics. we can't we won't not feasible.

The answer is no. It matters little what nonsense is trotted out why. Both those countries could benefit both in hard currency and the inevitable development that WOULD HAVE resulted. Whining now isn't going to change that basic fact. Just be thankful that breathing air isn't a commodity because they would hold their breaths until they turned blue - just to make a point.

See this is what I come up against whenever the issue of development for the PA is raised. Whatever whenever however the response is always no. So just be honest and say you want a bribe, I understand what baksheesh is. Just admit it.

[Mehmet III]

Originally posted by Mediocrates
Such polemics. we can't we won't not feasible.

The answer is no. It matters little what nonsense is trotted out why. Both those countries could benefit both in hard currency and the inevitable development that WOULD HAVE resulted. Whining now isn't going to change that basic fact. Just be thankful that breathing air isn't a commodity because they would hold their breaths until they turned blue - just to make a point.

See this is what I come up against whenever the issue of development for the PA is raised. Whatever whenever however the response is always no. So just be honest and say you want a bribe, I understand what baksheesh is. Just admit it.

Since when are valid reasons considered "whining"? The response is no for a reason, if you would listen instead of complaining then you might learn WHY the answer is no.

[Mediocrates]

No there is no reason there is simply the decision to say no. No where else on earth are possible economic solutions met with a firm "NO". Without even the pretence of an explanation. There is no sanction against Iraq developing water supplies. There is nothing that the Syrians even have to do. Other countries would do the investment and the development. All they have to do is sit there like Shiekdoms who import technology and people to get oil out of the ground.

But always the answer is no no no no. Why? They want to use it as a weapon against the Israelis no matter the cost to their own societies. For example while Syria has enough water they don't have it in the right place at the right time. So what they need is a pipeline. But with that they could irragate orders of magnitude more crop land

You do remember all the Russian investment in the Aswan High Dam project in Egypt, yes? All the Egyptians had to do was stay out of the way.

[Mediocrates]

Yes yea I know all about Golani which the Syrians seem perfectly happy to let go - even the disputed "farms" whcih even the Syrians say never belonged to them.

No the problem for them is they refuse to dislodge Hezbollah from forward positions because it suits their egos to wage war by proxy. Well I hope they learn to drink sand.

[Mehmet III]

No there is no reason there is simply the decision to say no. No where else on earth are possible economic solutions met with a firm "NO". Without even the pretence of an explanation.

there IS a reason and i have already given it to you! You only prove my point when i say that you are not listening!!

There is nothing that the Syrians even have to do. Other countries would do the investment and the development. All they have to do is sit there like Shiekdoms who import technology and people to get oil out of the ground.

When foreign countries invest in a countries resources the profits are split between the foreign country and the host country. If the host country does all of the work, they will not have to split the money.

But always the answer is no no no no. Why? They want to use it as a weapon against the Israelis no matter the cost to their own societies. For example while Syria has enough water they don't have it in the right place at the right time. So what they need is a pipeline. But with that they could irragate orders of magnitude more crop land

You are paranoid "use ...weapon.. against....Israelis...no matter the cost" but i suppose the paranoia is rightfully so considering Israel is surrounded by enemies. If Syria is going out of its way to make such a point, why do you think they are doing so? Like I said, you are not listening to them and that is why they are trying all the harder to make the point.

[Mehmet III]

No the problem for them is they refuse to dislodge Hezbollah from forward positions because it suits their egos to wage war by proxy. Well I hope they learn to drink sand.

it suits their egos? dont say stuff you cant prove