Comments on: Who’s evacuating the Lebanese civilians?

By: Bill

Bill — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 17:00:00 +0000

I have a subscription to BBC news hour through audible and they have been doing a reasonable job of getting the Isreali, Syrian, and Lebenese on, including the head of Hezbollah.

The situation defies any logic or rationale I can make out. They start talking about today and explain that is happening because of what happened yesterday, which was set up by the actions of over the last decade, and pretty soon you are arguing over the history of Mesipotamia.

I'm not making light of this, I just don't see how anything close to a simple answer is possible.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 17:00:00 +0000

Israel is in violation of something like 24, that's UN resolutions. Sort of late for this article.

By: dnorman

dnorman — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 17:00:00 +0000

yeah. I can’t believe they bombed a UN facility (well marked) as well as bombarding the rescue effort. I’m really hoping that was a collosal communication breakdown (akin to the US accidentally bombing Canadian troups in Afghanistan), but I can’t believe the UN didn’t slam the door after that happened. unbelievable. I’m all for protecting civilians – which is what Israel is attempting to do – but their method pretty much sucks.

By: Sami Khan

Sami Khan — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 17:00:00 +0000

Check this map out! and D'Arcy you should create a blog entry about it!

By: Howard Hansen

Howard Hansen — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 17:00:00 +0000

Actuallly, there already are UN peacekeepers in southern Lebanon. And by not disbanding Hizbullah and asserting its control, Lebanon is in violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1559.

By: Heather

Heather — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 17:00:00 +0000

D'Arcy,

I put the plight of the Lebanese civilians right up there with the plight of the Iraqi civilian, or the Sudanese civilian, or even the Israeli civilian. They are simply numbers to much of the world. Much like victims of earthquakes, hurricanes, etc. (Don't get me started on race and religion playing a role as well)

As for the guys in the blue helmets moving in ... Hezbollah won't let the Lebanese army, the army that is officially suppose to be defending the country, move in so I can't see them tolerating the blue helmets.

While I'll probably be labeled a self-hating Jew for this, the level of response from Israel and the mounting casualties are only going to fuel terrorist sympathies, much as the US invasion of Iraq has done.

By: dnorman

dnorman — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 17:00:00 +0000

Heather – I agree that a real humanitarian effort is needed elsewhere as well (Sudan especially, Iraq to clean up after the liberation).

The point I was trying to make is that the Western World is able to mobilize thousands (hundreds of thousands in some cases) of troups to protect oil supplies. A fraction of that, managed by UN Peacekeepers, would be able to clean out Hezbollah in short order. But there’s no oil in Lebanon, so the civilians are left to fend for themselves.

Israel did what it felt it had to do. It might not have been the most clear-headed response, but we are lucky enough not to live within missile range of People Who Want To Hurt Us™ – Israel’s pretty much surrounded, so lives with a pretty itchy trigger finger to try to dissuade people from bothering it too much.

But, was this escalation warranted in response to the kidnapping of two combatants? Not sure. But, if they didn’t respond, Hezbollah would have been handed a free pass to keep it up. Israel is (rightly or wrongly) taking the fight to them to prevent further incidents. Unfortunately, there are over 10 million innocent civilians caught in the crossfire (10 million in Israel, 3.5 in Lebanon).

By: Raj Boora

Raj Boora — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 17:00:00 +0000

Not to make light of the cause of this latest round, but it seems to be like an earthquake... with smaller tremors rumbling for a while and this is something bigger... brought on by the capture of a soldier. A single soldier, who likely understands that it is part of the job description to potentially be captured if found in a conflict area.

I remember in a Philosphy of War class that I took way back when, that the prof, who himself had fought in the 6 Days War said that the one driving idea in Isreal that they have promised never to have happen to them again what happened over the span of WWII. And fair enough, no people should have to suffer that. But if we look at this reaction as not turning the other cheek and standing tall for the saftey of one soldier... is that one life worth all the others have have been lost? I'm thinking it's not about the soldier any more.

If we compare this to what the US might do, it is similar - they would not leave one of thier men behind (black ops and movies aside) but likely it would be something more akin to a surgical intervention.

Finally it's scarey, as my brother pointed out last night... when Condi Rice is actually more moderating than the Canadian officials involved.