Kimche is making an interesting point in his article, and no doubt his extensive experience with foreign/security affairs and intelligence undergird his perspective--one of active pragmatism and not ossified ideology. But in point of fact, "prying" away Syria from Iran is an incredibly difficult task and there's a certain element of wishful thinking there. The fact that Bashar is secular doesn't make his country's 20 year alliance with Iran any less real. I also am not at all convinced that Hezbollah will abandon its resistance to Israel simply because Syria strikes a deal (as unlikely as that is). I applaud Kimche's creative thinking, but clearly in this case necessity is the mother of invention, and the necessity is the sorry state of our standing in that part of the world.

Despite my skepticism here, I view such efforts to think creatively as a good thing on balance. If only our government would stop thinking of itself as a 40 year old, divorced virgin and understand that it can actually speak to people it has strong disagreements with, we'd all be better off. What in God's name are they afraid of? After all, we can blow anyone off the face of the map any time we choose; do they actually think no one realizes that? So why not talk to anyone, anytime to advance our own understanding and security?

When our "principles" get in the way of peacefully resolving avoidable conflict (not all conflicts--sometimes you do have to draw the line) the principles need to get reassessed. Period.

BMR

Steve,

A word of advice, when one clicks on a link or image on your site it should open a new tab (for those using Firefox, IE7 or other browswers that feature tabbed browsing) or open a new/separate window.

You need to keep your site up and open so that readers can easily come back to it after consuming the linked content.

Lastly, please pick a date.

Best,

C

I agree with BMR above. Kimche does not make an interesting point about "prying" Syria from Iran, but I also wonder whether that is possible. More importantly, I doubt that Syria or Iran will be able to pacify Hezbollah at this point in time.

Not that there is any chance that Mr. Haniya and his allies will ever make peace with Israel - they refuse to even recognize its right to exist -but, when Palestinian militant factions are still kidnapping innocent AP photographers, it shows how depraved some of their population is as well.
here is the story:

http://tinyurl.com/ycs8hu

I have witnessed a predominance of anti-Israel sentiment expressed in the comments on this blog. certainly some of it IS justified. But, by the same token, some of it is NOT. To accuse the Israelis of genocide is, in my opinion, reckless and untrue. Israel is engaged in a war with Palestinians... and many other Arab countries, which daily teach their children to hate and to kill. I agree that many of Israel's policies HAVE been misguided and certainly innefective in transforming the situation for the better. but, to demonize the Israelis alone is unfair.

Further, I've always seen GWB's policies as ANYTHING but pro-Israel. The U.S's disengagement and the subsequent collapse of the Israeli/Palestinian peace negotiations have been everything BUT good for Israel.

And the ocuupation of Iraq?! NOBODY can make the case that the middle east is more stable today.

GWB and this group of Republicans have done more damage to America and to world stability than any american administration or ruling party in my lifetime!

PLEASE VOTE THESE MANIACS OUT!!!

No sign of these developments on the Korean peninsula in domestic media so far:

http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200610/200610200005.html

Winnipeger wrote:
"I agree that many of Israel's policies HAVE been misguided and certainly innefective in transforming the situation for the better. but, to demonize the Israelis alone is unfair."

It sure seems that those in power in Israel, which one must include the Mossad, are not the kind of people who are creative world problem solvers or peacemakers.

I wonder if the former Mossad Deputy Head would know and approve of the following story from yesterday's news?

"Israel admits phosphorous bombs used in Lebanon"
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article1919396.ece

Who besides the Bush Admin and Israel are so openly defying international law and the Geneva Conventions these days?

"Who besides the Bush Admin and Israel are so openly defying international law and the Geneva Conventions these days?"

Hezbollah
Palestinian militants
Islamic fundamentalists/terrorists
Syria
Iran

...Just to name a few.

Dear Winnipeger

Israel should be put on the list of terrorist countries right along with the other axis of evils. There isn't enough lipstick in the world to make this pig look like anything but what it is. They are no better than any other terrorist and in some respects worse because their agression is motivated by sheer greed for resources and desire to 'expand" their state.
As far as teaching children to hate, no one beats the Israelis for racism toward anyone not jewish.

I suggest you bone up on exactly what genocide is:

The international legal definition of the crime of genocide is found in Articles II and III of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide.

Article II describes two elements of the crime of genocide:

1) the mental element, meaning the "intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such", and

2) the physical element which includes five acts described in sections a, b, c, d and e. A crime must include both elements to be called "genocide."

Article III described five punishable forms of the crime of genocide: genocide; conspiracy, incitement, attempt and complicity.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Excerpt from the Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of Genocide (For full text click here)
"Article II: In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Article III: The following acts shall be punishable:

(a) Genocide;

(b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;

(c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;

(d) Attempt to commit genocide;

(e) Complicity in genocide. "

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is a crime to plan or incite genocide, even before killing starts, and to aid or abet genocide: Criminal acts include conspiracy, direct and public incitement, attempts to commit genocide, and complicity in genocide.
Punishable Acts The following are genocidal acts when committed as part of a policy to destroy a group’s existence:

Killing members of the group includes direct killing and actions causing death.

Causing serious bodily or mental harm includes inflicting trauma on members of the group through widespread torture, rape, sexual violence, forced or coerced use of drugs, and mutilation.

Deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to destroy a group includes the deliberate deprivation of resources needed for the group’s physical survival, such as clean water, food, clothing, shelter or medical services. Deprivation of the means to sustain life can be imposed through confiscation of harvests, blockade of foodstuffs, detention in camps, forcible relocation or expulsion into deserts.

Prevention of births includes involuntary sterilization, forced abortion, prohibition of marriage, and long-term separation of men and women intended to prevent procreation.

Forcible transfer of children may be imposed by direct force or by fear of violence, duress, detention, psychological oppression or other methods of coercion. The Convention on the Rights of the Child defines children as persons under the age of 18 years.

Genocidal acts need not kill or cause the death of members of a group. Causing serious bodily or mental harm, prevention of births and transfer of children are acts of genocide when committed as part of a policy to destroy a group’s existence.

The law protects four groups - national, ethnical, racial or religious groups.

A national group means a set of individuals whose identity is defined by a common country of nationality or national origin.

An ethnical group is a set of individuals whose identity is defined by common cultural traditions, language or heritage.

A racial group means a set of individuals whose identity is defined by physical characteristics.

A religious group is a set of individuals whose identity is defined by common religious creeds, beliefs, doctrines, practices, or rituals.

(AND PAY ATTENTION TO THE FOLLOWING TWO PARAGRAPHS,BECAUSE THEY ARE NAILS IN ISRAEL'S COFFIN IF THEY EVER GET TO THE ICC)

1)The crime of genocide has two elements: intent and action. “Intentional” means purposeful. Intent can be proven directly from statements or orders. But more often, it must be inferred from a "SYSTEMATIC PATTERN" of coordinated acts.

2)Intent is different from motive. Whatever may be the motive for the crime (land expropriation, national security, territorrial integrity, etc.), if the perpetrators commit acts intended to destroy a group, even part of a group, it is genocide.

The phrase "in whole or in part" is important. Perpetrators need not intend to destroy the entire group. Destruction of only part of a group (such as its educated members, or members living in one region) is also genocide. Most authorities require intent to destroy a substantial number of group members – mass murder. But an individual criminal may be guilty of genocide even if he kills only one person, so long as he knew he was participating in a larger plan to destroy the group.

For a more detailed description of the crimes described in Article II (Rome Statute Article 6) see the Elements of the Crime of Genocide agreed upon by the International Criminal Court Preparatory Commission in June 2000.

Carroll,

I don't have the time to read through your entire diatribe, but I would like to refute two points:

You wrote:

They (Israel) are no better than any other terrorist and in some respects worse because their agression is motivated by sheer greed for resources and desire to 'expand" their state"

I completely disagree with you on this central issue. Israel's aggression is largely motivated by SELF-DEFENSE! I'm incredulous that you would omit this fact.

Secondly, you wrote:

"As far as teaching children to hate, no one beats the Israelis for racism toward anyone not jewish."

This is pure claptrap BS! What are you basing your opinion on? the Protocols of the Elders of Zion?!

This is a despicable and deplorable lie, Carroll! One that says to me that you have crossed the line from genuine disagreement with Israeli policy into flat-out anti-semitism and hatred of Jews.

Have you ever visited Israel!? Have you ever visited an Israeli school or a Jewish day school in North America?! further, Have you ever visited a madrassah? Do I really need to link to the widespread and well reported criticism of the latter?

Based on your comments above, you deserve to be IGNORED and repudiated by readers of this blog!

One other point I forgot to mention, Carroll, in response to this outrageous claim you made:

As far as teaching children to hate, no one beats the Israelis for racism toward anyone not jewish."

Do you realize that 20% of Israelis are NOT Jewish?!

So I guess, based on your "logic," 20% of Israelis are teaching their kids to hate themselves.

Speaking of the Mossad, it reminds me of another reason why I am so enthused about the rise of Barack Obama, replacing Hillary and Bill as the leaders of the Democrats:

Israel’s Mossad was taping Bill’s and Monica’s phone sex!

Gordon Thomas, in his book Gideon’s Spies, (p.103) says that the Mossad, Israel’s intelligence service, was taping Bill’s phone sex with Monica! Danny Yatom, the head of the Mossad, sent a spy team in March, 1997, to Washington D.C. based on reports “that President Clinton was repeatedly indulging in phone-sex calls with a former White House aide, Monica Lewinsky … Knowing the White House was totally protected by electronic counter-measures, the yahalomin team focused on Lewinsky’s apartment. They began to intercept explicit phone calls from the president to Lewinsky. The recordings were couriered by diplomatic bag to Tel Aviv.”
Ken Starr in the Starr Report says that on March 29, 1997 “[Bill] told [Monica] that he suspected a foreign embassy … was taping his telephones. If anyone ever asked about their phone sex, she should say that they knew that their calls were being monitored all day long, and the phone sex was a put on.” [Gideon’s Spies, p.104]
Also, on 3-29-97, besides discussing the fact that their phone sex was being taped by foreign intelligence, Bill climaxed in oral sex with Monica and he manually stimulated Monica to 4 orgasms. [Toobin, A Vast Conspiracy, p. 111]

Dear Winnipeger...in reply to

"I completely disagree with you on this central issue. Israel's aggression is largely motivated by SELF-DEFENSE! I'm incredulous that you would omit this fact."

...The "self defense" arguement is is the number one most worn out excuse. It's a world joke that no one believes any longer.

"As far as teaching children to hate, no one beats the Israelis for racism toward anyone not jewish."
This is a despicable and deplorable lie, Carroll! One that says to me that you have crossed the line from genuine disagreement with Israeli policy into flat-out anti-semitism and hatred of Jews."

..Oh yada,yada,yada...anti semite is also the number one worn out slur for anyone calling a spade a spade on Israel. Frankly my dear I don't care if you are Jewish, Budhist or Presbyterian..according to accepted international law and the morals of 90% of the universe you are a terrorist state.

Let me repeat this...Israel is a terrorist state, anyone supporting their occupation/aquisition for real estate in Palestine and their actions in Lebanon is a terrorist enabler.

mmmm, kim-chee

...and let me repeat this, Carroll:

anyone who would post the following IS anti-semitic AND stupid

"As far as teaching children to hate, no one beats the Israelis for racism toward anyone not jewish."

Don't bother responding. You've already destroyed another thread on this blog.

"according to accepted international law and the morals of 90% of the universe you are a terrorist state."

Funny. I thought i was a person!

Isn't your kindergarten nap time over about now?

Though you don't need my support Carroll, you defend yourself well enough, I offer it anyway.

Crimes against humanity are crimes against humanity.

Upwards of 4 million bomblets dispersed on south lebanon has got nothing to do with self-defense. Burning flesh with phosphorus weapons has got nothing to do with self-defense.

I know this has very little to do with Steve's post but it is difficult to let the comments of some posters pass.

"I completely disagree with you on this central issue. Israel's aggression is largely motivated by SELF-DEFENSE! I'm incredulous that you would omit this fact."

A long discredited myth, plausible only to those unwilling to apply the same standards to both sides.

To claim the invasion of Lebanon was self-defense rather than an attempt to destroy Palestinian identity stretches credulity. Even most Israelis aren't that brazen. Also I would have thought that the settlements alone proved Israel is as much interested in land as it is in self-defense.

If not how about;

Ben Gurion's letter to his son Amos describing how they would seize land outside the original boundaries of Israel by any means possible. The Haganah's Plan Dalet, declassified long after partition, describes how Ben Gurion's seizure was implemented.

Or the fact that Begin and Rabin both admitted that Nasser didn't want war in 1967 seriously undermining their claim that the attack was 'peemptive'. It was no more 'preemptive' than the Arab attack in 1973.

Then we have Dayan's widely publicized interview with an Israeli journalist and friend in which he describes how, in 1967, Israel deliberately provoked Syria at the urging of Kibbutz residences who wanted Syrian land.

The number of such examples is endless....

"Upwards of 4 million bomblets dispersed on south lebanon has got nothing to do with self-defense. Burning flesh with phosphorus weapons has got nothing to do with self-defense."

As horrifying and disgusting as they are, both have EVERYTHING to do with war... and self defense.

Hezbollah crosses the border and kidnaps Israeli soldiers? Hezbollah launches thousand of rockets into Israel from South Lebanon? Israel drops bomblets in South lebanon to keep their enemies at bay.

Phosphorus bombs dropped on Hezbollah fighters in Lebanon? The same fighters who were and are waging war against Israel? This alone is NOT a breach of the Geneva convention. only if these munitions are intentioanlly dropped upon civilians or against military forces in civilian areas is a military breaching the Geneva Convention.

Not that hezbollah or Israel's enemies give a fu*k about the Geneva convention. But, I'm sure that none of Israel's critics cares about that reality.

"Hezbollah crosses the border and kidnaps Israeli soldiers? Hezbollah launches thousand of rockets into Israel from South Lebanon? Israel drops bomblets in South lebanon to keep their enemies at bay."

The operating assumption seems to be that Israel can 'defend' itself kidnapping whoever they see fit and hold them without charge indefinitely, but their opponent can't.

Clear enough.

"To claim the invasion of Lebanon was self-defense rather than an attempt to destroy Palestinian identity stretches credulity"

Palestinian identity in the Shia south of lebanon?!?!

If you cannot see the OBVIOUS, then there is no point in debating you or others.

let me repeat, this past summer, Israel was invaded and attacked by Hezbollah soldiers, supported by Syria and Iran. the Lebanese governemnt was unable to control its borders and suppress Hezbollah and Israel was forced to do so.

It always amazes me how people blame Israel alone for problems in the middle east - as if her neighbors are purely sympathetic, peaceful, rational actors.

"Palestinian identity in the Shia south of lebanon?!?!"

I was referring to the '82 Lebanese invasion but given that they're have been so many, your confusion is understandable.

"let me repeat, this past summer, Israel was invaded and attacked by Hezbollah soldiers, supported by Syria and Iran. the Lebanese governemnt was unable to control its borders and suppress Hezbollah and Israel was forced to do so."

And let me point out that earlier in the year Israel shot across the border and killed an unarmed teenage Lebanese shepherd, Ibrahim Rhayyel. and that Hezbollah vowed to retaliate.

Dear Winnipeger

Want some more?

Let's start at the begining shall we? Which would be:

On Article 49 - Gulity

Article 49

The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.

And moving right on thru the list of the:

Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War

On Article 33 - Guilty

Article 33
No protected person may be punished for an offence he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited.

On Article 53 - Guilty

Article 53

Any destruction by the Occupying Power of real or personal property belonging individually or collectively to private persons, or to the State, or to other public authorities, or to social or cooperative organizations, is prohibited, except where such destruction is rendered absolutely necessary by military operations.

On Article 55 - Guilty

Article 55

To the fullest extent of the means available to it the Occupying Power has the duty of ensuring the food and medical supplies of the population; it should, in particular, bring in the necessary foodstuffs, medical stores and other articles if the resources of the occupied territory are inadequate.

FIRST PROTOCAL(S)

On Articles 48 & 51 - Guilty

Article 48 — Basic rule
Parties shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants and accordingly shall direct their operations only against military objectives.

Article 51 — Protection of the civilian population
Indiscriminate attacks are prohibited. Indiscriminate attacks are:
(a) Those which are not directed at a specific military objective;
(b) Those which employ a method or means of combat which cannot be directed at a specific military objective

Among others, the following types of attacks are to be considered as indiscriminate:
(a) An attack by bombardment which treats as a single military objective a number of clearly separated and distinct military objectives located in a city, town, village or other area containing a similar concentration of civilians;
(b) An attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.

Need I go on? You are a terrorist state guilty of war crimes. Period.

Perhaps we should refrain from muddying this thread any more than we already have, but I do want to ask you why you think Israel shot across the border, killing Ibrahim? Was their objective to kill an unarmed shepherd or did they mistake him for one of the hoards of militants who have sworn to destroy Israel and who have been firing over the northern border for years?

Further, I believe it is a mistake and misleading to cite this isolated event as Hezbollah's ratioanale for retaliating and waging war against Israel.

Hezbollah has sworn to destroy Israel and American interests for many, many years. Wake up.

Carroll,

with all due respect, I AM NOT A "TERRORIST STATE."

You may want to brush up on your usage of nouns.

since your teacher didn't do his/her job, I'll offer you the following definition from the dictionary:

State (steyt) noun

a politically unified people occupying a definite territory; nation

Back to Steve's subject.

As to David Kimche's "enlightened views"...

"Should we? Can we pick up the Syrian gauntlet? Only within a package deal involving the United States, and Lebanon. The Americans must first be persuaded that prying Syria away from the clutches of Iran is an objective worth pursuing. The advantages for us are manifest: defusing the dangerous Iranian-led axis in the North, expelling the Hamas and Jihad extremists from Damascus, paving the way for relations with the rest of the Arab world. There is, of course, the Golan. Successive prime ministers, including Binyamin Netanyahu, had been willing to compromise our position on the Golan for the sake of peace with Syria. Future negotiations with the weak Assad could probably produce better results for us than previous efforts"

Number One...Kimche should be thinking "How to Pry Israel off Palestine" first. There is nothing in his "enlightened view that isn't more of their Isrmerica empire delusion. Just like tiny brain rats who stimulate their pleasure centers to their death, the Israelis are going to punch this "regional empire" button right up to the day they expire.

Number Two..65% or more of American are not interested any more stragetizing/ minuplating "package deals" with the US on how to provide "manifest advantages" to Israel under the "guise" of the terrier war since they responsible for 90% of their own problems and a major cause of terrorism in the ME.

Number Three...I am seriously thinking of forming my own Soccer-Mom's Mossad, ripping the intestines out of these blooding sucking Israeli parasites and neo pond scum and shoving them down their throats if they don't quit fucking with my children's country and goverment.

"Israel's aggression is largely motivated by SELF-DEFENSE!"

Yeah, thats why there are literally hundreds of thousands of cluster bombs littering the Lebanese countryside, fired into Lebanon when a cease fire was imminent. The assertion that this kind of action is committed in "self-defense" is a damned lie. It is just the same as the issue as to why Israel bulldozes Palestinian orchards and farmlands. Such an action is NOT an act of self defense. It is an act designed to demoralize the Palestinians, and rob them of their substenance and livelyhoods. To frame it in any other manner is dishonest and despicable. The "sound bombs" that Israel uses at night are just as despicable, and can IN NO MANNER be described as a "defensive weapon". Anyone that is informed and aware of the actual tactics being employed by Israel cannot piossibly cite this "self-defense" horseshit in clear conscience. To cite such blatant falsehood supplies us with a direct window hrough which we can view your character and your integrity. I challenge you to explain to me how the sound bombs can be described as "defensive weapons", or how cluttering olive orchards with thousands of cluster bombs can be described as "an act of defense".

OK, read the following, and tell me how this tactic can, by ANY stretch of the imagination, be considered "defensive".

Targeting Gaza’s Children with Sound Bombs

By Mike Whitney

07/05/06 "Information Clearing House" - -

http://tinyurl.com/y8ethr

"The killing, abduction, and suppression of the Palestinians by the Israeli military forces do not conform to any reason or logic; rather they flout the Jewish beliefs." Official Statement of the Iranian Jewish Community
The photographs of bombed-out buildings, burned-down power plants, and blown-up bridges only tell half the story of Israel’s terror-war on the people in Gaza. Absent from the pictures is the screeching sound of the F-16s flying overhead day-and-night producing the explosive sonic booms that shatter windows and terrify children. Israel has been remarkably successful in its psychological war against the Palestinians; exacting a heavy toll against the people for whom it was designed, Palestinian children. As author John Pilger notes in a recent article "The War on Children"

"Dr. Khalid Dahlan, a psychiatrist who heads a children's community health project, told me, 'The statistic I personally find unbearable is that 99.4 percent of the children we studied suffer trauma … 99.2 percent had their homes bombarded; 97.5 percent were exposed to tear gas; 96.6 percent witnessed shooting; a third saw family members or neighbors injured or killed.’"
Dr. Dahlan’s findings are consistent with other studies which show that at least 72.8% of children in the occupied territories suffer some form of trauma from exposure to random explosions and violence. The result has been a steady up-tick in the number of children who suffer from long-term effects of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) a condition which can have a destructive effect on mental development and create adults that are excessively nervous, needy or depressed. As Pilger avers, "These children suffer unrelenting nightmares and 'night terrors’ and the dichotomy of having to cope with these conditions."

Israel’s sonic blasts are part of a larger psy-ops war that is aimed at directly at children; it has no other conceivable purpose. The explosions have no military value except to attack the fragile psyche of the most vulnerable and sensitive. As the survey indicates, Israel’s plan has succeeded quite admirably. In fact, Israel is so pleased with the results of its psy-ops terror-campaign that it has developed "sound bombs" which are intended to create widespread fear and trauma.

This new weapon has been successfully deployed in Gaza "inducing miscarriages and traumatizing children". Israel is aware of these effects and continues to use the weapon regardless of the human suffering it causes.

Just think of the money that could be saved if the Palestinians can just be kept in abeyance by producing a constant state of trepidation.

This appears to be the rationale of the Israeli leadership, who continue to explore the frontiers of psycho-anxiety weaponry.

What other possible reason could there be for sound bombs?

The moral implications of targeting children with mind-damaging weaponry is profound and alarming. To my thinking, it measures up quite impressively with the depraved acts of 9-11. Perhaps, it even exceeds them. After all, is there a more heinous crime than purposefully hurting children?

In recent weeks we have seen numerous incidents where children were killed or wounded by Israeli bombs or missiles. The most widely-publicized of these was the attack on the beach in Gaza where an entire family was killed instantly leaving behind a young Palestinian girl who has become a symbol of Israeli callousness and injustice.

As Pilger notes,

"For the Palestinians, a war against their children is hardly new. A 2004 field study published in the British Medical Journal reported that, in the previous 4 years, 'Two-thirds 621 children killed (by Israelis) at checkpoints…on the way to school, in their homes, died from small arms fire, directed in over half the cases to the head neck and chest—the sniper’s wound."
Whether the Israeli people support a policy that intentionally targets children is irrelevant. As the "sound bombs" indicate, such a policy does in fact exist. Also, as the "sniper wounds" of over 400 children suggest, the killing of children is, at the very least, tolerated as an unavoidable consequence of occupation.

This is completely unacceptable.

How does a nation wander so far from its founding principles that children are willingly sacrificed as the price for attaining one’s territorial ambitions? This is truly the calculus of human suffering.

Israel should reject the fanatical militarism and racism of its leaders and do what they can to stop this unfolding catastrophe. The "sound bombs" may be an effective tool for subjugating the occupied peoples, but they are also a poignant memento of Israel’s regrettable slide into moral squalor. If "Greater Israel" is to be built on the lives of innocent children, the cost is too high. It would be preferable for the Israeli people to reassert their commitment to the basic values espoused in their own religion, a religion of peace which teaches forbearance, humanity and justice. Stop this assault on women and children, withdraw the troops from Gaza and get back to the bargaining table. That’s the only way we can solve this conflict and pull the entire region back from the brink of disaster.

OK, read the following, and tell me how this tactic can, by ANY stretch of the imagination, be considered "defensive".

Targeting Gaza’s Children with Sound Bombs

By Mike Whitney

07/05/06 "Information Clearing House" - -

http://tinyurl.com/y8ethr

"The killing, abduction, and suppression of the Palestinians by the Israeli military forces do not conform to any reason or logic; rather they flout the Jewish beliefs." Official Statement of the Iranian Jewish Community
The photographs of bombed-out buildings, burned-down power plants, and blown-up bridges only tell half the story of Israel’s terror-war on the people in Gaza. Absent from the pictures is the screeching sound of the F-16s flying overhead day-and-night producing the explosive sonic booms that shatter windows and terrify children. Israel has been remarkably successful in its psychological war against the Palestinians; exacting a heavy toll against the people for whom it was designed, Palestinian children. As author John Pilger notes in a recent article "The War on Children"

"Dr. Khalid Dahlan, a psychiatrist who heads a children's community health project, told me, 'The statistic I personally find unbearable is that 99.4 percent of the children we studied suffer trauma … 99.2 percent had their homes bombarded; 97.5 percent were exposed to tear gas; 96.6 percent witnessed shooting; a third saw family members or neighbors injured or killed.’"
Dr. Dahlan’s findings are consistent with other studies which show that at least 72.8% of children in the occupied territories suffer some form of trauma from exposure to random explosions and violence. The result has been a steady up-tick in the number of children who suffer from long-term effects of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) a condition which can have a destructive effect on mental development and create adults that are excessively nervous, needy or depressed. As Pilger avers, "These children suffer unrelenting nightmares and 'night terrors’ and the dichotomy of having to cope with these conditions."

Israel’s sonic blasts are part of a larger psy-ops war that is aimed at directly at children; it has no other conceivable purpose. The explosions have no military value except to attack the fragile psyche of the most vulnerable and sensitive. As the survey indicates, Israel’s plan has succeeded quite admirably. In fact, Israel is so pleased with the results of its psy-ops terror-campaign that it has developed "sound bombs" which are intended to create widespread fear and trauma.

This new weapon has been successfully deployed in Gaza "inducing miscarriages and traumatizing children". Israel is aware of these effects and continues to use the weapon regardless of the human suffering it causes.

Just think of the money that could be saved if the Palestinians can just be kept in abeyance by producing a constant state of trepidation.

This appears to be the rationale of the Israeli leadership, who continue to explore the frontiers of psycho-anxiety weaponry.

What other possible reason could there be for sound bombs?

The moral implications of targeting children with mind-damaging weaponry is profound and alarming. To my thinking, it measures up quite impressively with the depraved acts of 9-11. Perhaps, it even exceeds them. After all, is there a more heinous crime than purposefully hurting children?

In recent weeks we have seen numerous incidents where children were killed or wounded by Israeli bombs or missiles. The most widely-publicized of these was the attack on the beach in Gaza where an entire family was killed instantly leaving behind a young Palestinian girl who has become a symbol of Israeli callousness and injustice.

As Pilger notes,

"For the Palestinians, a war against their children is hardly new. A 2004 field study published in the British Medical Journal reported that, in the previous 4 years, 'Two-thirds 621 children killed (by Israelis) at checkpoints…on the way to school, in their homes, died from small arms fire, directed in over half the cases to the head neck and chest—the sniper’s wound."
Whether the Israeli people support a policy that intentionally targets children is irrelevant. As the "sound bombs" indicate, such a policy does in fact exist. Also, as the "sniper wounds" of over 400 children suggest, the killing of children is, at the very least, tolerated as an unavoidable consequence of occupation.

This is completely unacceptable.

How does a nation wander so far from its founding principles that children are willingly sacrificed as the price for attaining one’s territorial ambitions? This is truly the calculus of human suffering.

Israel should reject the fanatical militarism and racism of its leaders and do what they can to stop this unfolding catastrophe. The "sound bombs" may be an effective tool for subjugating the occupied peoples, but they are also a poignant memento of Israel’s regrettable slide into moral squalor. If "Greater Israel" is to be built on the lives of innocent children, the cost is too high. It would be preferable for the Israeli people to reassert their commitment to the basic values espoused in their own religion, a religion of peace which teaches forbearance, humanity and justice. Stop this assault on women and children, withdraw the troops from Gaza and get back to the bargaining table. That’s the only way we can solve this conflict and pull the entire region back from the brink of disaster.

"I believe it is a mistake and misleading to cite this isolated event as Hezbollah's ratioanale for retaliating and waging war against Israel."

Winnipeger does seem to believe that the isolated kidnapping of an Israeli soldier does justify all-out war on Lebanon however.

Go figure.

When you plant a bomb in a restaurant and kill about a dozen human beings, that makes you a terrorist. When you kill 30 children from the cockpit of an f-16, that makes you an IDF pilot. As Brendan Behan reported said: The terrorist is the one with the small bomb.

Carrol wrote:

"Number Two..65% or more of American are not interested any more stragetizing/ minuplating "package deals" with the US on how to provide "manifest advantages" to Israel under the "guise" of the terrier war since they responsible for 90% of their own problems and a major cause of terrorism in the ME."

On which demographic studies do you base your assertions? Are we supposed to buy this uninformed BS? They are "responsible" for 90% of their "own" problems?! Give us a break with this drivel, Carrol.

and here is the clincher:

"I am seriously thinking of forming my own Soccer-Mom's Mossad, ripping the intestines out of these blooding sucking Israeli parasites and neo pond scum and shoving them down their throats."

beautiful Carrol! And you claim that the Israeli's teach hatred? I think that you could hold a master class yourself.

Shame on you. You are the embodiment of the characteristics that you demonize in others; a hypocrite.

"Winnipeger does seem to believe that the isolated kidnapping of an Israeli soldier does justify all-out war on Lebanon however."

wrong, Tom.

But, I do think that a cross border incursion, kidnapping of soldiers and then uninterupted artillery fire on PURELY civilian targets DOES justify a war.

You and others obviously disagree. I respect your opinions (aside from carroll's ignorant and disgraceful tirades). Please offer me the same respect.

Thank you

Pissed off American,

I do agree with some of what you say in your final paragraph:

"withdraw the troops from Gaza and get back to the bargaining table. That’s the only way we can solve this conflict and pull the entire region back from the brink of disaster."

The only problem is that one cannot bargain or make peace with oneself. At this time, Israel has nobody to negotiate with on the palestinian side. I'm sure that you're aware of Hamas' position, as well as the bloody civil war that is taking place in Gaza between the supporters of Hamas and Fatah.

But I do disagree with Mr. Pilger's (and your) characterization and definition of "sound bombs." as Mr. Pilger goes on to note, these are not "bombs" at all, merely sonic booms created by jets flying overhead. What mr. Pilger does not explain in his essay, is that these same sonic booms are heard everywhere in israel. Constantly. I don't know if you or others have ever visited Israel or the occupied territories, but we are talking about a VERY small area. Roughly the size of Rhode Island. Unfortunately, Jets are zipping around and training constantly, and sonic booms are a way of life.

IN NO WAY IS THE IDF TARGETING PALESTINIAN CHILDREN WITH "SOUND BOMBS"

This is the type of disinformation that makes people crazy.

IN NO WAY IS THE IDF TARGETING PALESTINIAN CHILDREN WITH "SOUND BOMBS"

This is the type of disinformation that makes people crazy.

Posted by Winnipeger

Yeah right.

Thats OK, they're only sonic booms. Thats why the UN is upset about it, huh?

Disinformation??

I'll tell you what "disinformmation" is.

"Disinformation" is calling an active policy of genocide "self defense".

Now, you want me to define "filthy liar" for you?

http://tinyurl.com/crnet

Palestinians hit by sonic boom air raids

· UN condemns night noise attacks as indiscriminate
· Agencies say they cause trauma and miscarriages

Chris McGreal in Gaza
Thursday November 3, 2005
The Guardian

Israel is deploying a terrifying new tactic against Palestinian civilians in the Gaza Strip by letting loose deafening "sound bombs" that cause widespread fear, induce miscarriages and traumatise children.
The removal of Jewish settlers from the Gaza Strip opened the way for the military to use air force jets to create dozens of sonic booms by breaking the sound barrier at low altitude, sending shockwaves across the territory, often at night. Palestinians liken the sound to an earthquake or huge bomb. They describe the effect as being hit by a wall of air that is painful on the ears, sometimes causing nosebleeds and "leaving you shaking inside".

The Palestinian health ministry says the sonic booms have led to miscarriages and heart problems. The United Nations has demanded an end to the tactic, saying it causes panic attacks in children. The shockwaves have also damaged buildings by cracking walls and smashing thousands of windows.

"I have never heard such a loud explosion. I thought it was right over the top of my building," said the owner, Tareq Dayyeh. "Sometimes you hear the rockets the Israelis fire but this was different. I felt like I was in the middle of a bomb. When I ran out the door I thought I might find the rest of the street was gone."

Over the past week, Israeli jets created 28 sonic booms by flying at high speed and low altitude over the Gaza Strip, sometimes as little as an hour apart through the night. During five days in late September, the air force caused 29 sonic booms.

A senior Israeli army intelligence source, who the military would not permit to be named, said the tactic is intended to break civilian support for armed Palestinian groups. "We are trying to send a message in a way that doesn't harm people. We want to encourage the Palestinian public to do something about the terror situation," he said. "What are the alternatives? We are not like the terrorists who shoot civilians. We are cautious. We make sure nobody is really hurt."

Yesterday, two medical human rights groups asked the Tel Aviv high court to outlaw the use of sound bombs on the grounds it amounts to illegal collective punishment and is detrimental to health.

continues at....

http://tinyurl.com/crnet

BTW, I live near Edwards Air Force Base. I rarely hear sonic booms. Our military is aware of their effect on the population, and keep the practice of generating sonic booms well away from populated areas. Your argument is pure unadulterated horseshit. And you know it. As does anyone else reading your tripe.

Report: AIPAC focus of fresh FBI probe

Sources told Time that the probe has been going on for months. The probe would try to determine whether Harman and AIPAC enlisted wealthy supporters to "lobby" House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi to reappoint Harman.
According to the sources, Israeli businessman Haim Saban is one of the wealthy individuals who lobbied for Pelosi on behalf of Harman. Saban contributed at least USD 3,000 to Harman's election campaign, congressional sources told Time.

http://tinyurl.com/ynf9wg

Say 'goodbye', Winnipeger (please).

Points well made, Carroll & POA.

FORMER BRITISH AMBASSADOR SUSPECTS U.K./U.S. GOVERNMENTS STOKING IRAQI CIVIL WAR
Dire situation goes from bad to worse and provides only excuse for troops to stay

Steve Watson & Paul Watson / Infowars.net | October 18 2006

Former British Ambassador to the Central Asian Republic of Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, writes today that he suspects the ongoing sectarian violence in Iraq has been intentionally provoked and continued by US and UK special forces in occupation of the country.

Murray states:

"As the catastrophe in Iraq continues to unfold, an unresolved question remains on the role of Bush, Blair, and the US/UK military. To what extent were they passively incompetent in facilitating the decline into civil war, and to what extent were they actively pursuing policies that promoted that outcome?"

Murray suspects that as part of a "divide and conquer" strategy, the same strategy used by British forces in Iraq 85 years ago, Special forces are being used to intentionally foment civil war by training and equipping Kurdish Peshmerga fighters and Shiite militiamen, to target Sunni insurgents and their sympathizers.

The adoption of the 'Salvador Option' by the US in Iraq was reported and discussed from the beginning of 2005 onwards.

Newsweek reported that this Pentagon or CIA handled operation "would even extend across the border into Syria, according to military insiders familiar with the discussions... The current thinking is that while U.S. Special Forces would lead operations in, say, Syria, activities inside Iraq itself would be carried out by Iraqi paramilitaries."

"The evidence that the US directly contributed to the creation of the current civil war in Iraq by its own secretive security strategy is compelling." Murray continues.

He goes on to point out that US Congressman Denis Kucinich took up the issue in April of this year in a letter to Donald Rumsfeld requesting all records pertaining to the plan.

Kucinich weighed in on the matter, providing further evidence that the Salvador Option was being implemented, he wrote:

."About one year before the Newsweek report on the "Salvador Option," it was reported in the American Prospect magazine on January 1, 2004 that part of $3 billion of the $87 billion Emergency Supplemental Appropriations bill to fund operations in Iraq, signed into law on November 6, 2003, was designated for the creation of a paramilitary unit manned by militiamen associated with former Iraqi exile groups. According to the Prospect article, experts predicted that creation of this paramilitary unit would "lead to a wave of extrajudicial killings, not only of armed rebels but of nationalists, other opponents of the U.S. occupation and thousands of civilian Baathists."

John Pilger wrote further about the Salvador Option in the New Statesman earlier this year, shedding light on the origins of the plot:

"The real news, which is not reported in the CNN "mainstream", is that the Salvador Option has been invoked in Iraq. This is the campaign of terror by death squads armed and trained by the US, which attack Sunnis and Shias alike. The goal is the incitement of a real civil war and the break-up of Iraq, the original war aim of Bush's administration. The ministry of the interior in Baghdad, which is run by the CIA, directs the principal death squads. Their members are not exclusively Shia, as the myth goes. The most brutal are the Sunni-led Special Police Commandos, headed by former senior officers in Saddam's Ba'ath Party. This unit was formed and trained by CIA "counter-insurgency" experts, including veterans of the CIA's terror operations in central America in the 1980s, notably El Salvador. "

The confirmation that the Salvador Option had been invoked came quite publicly just over a year ago when British SAS were caught dressed in Arab garb and attempting to stage a terror attacks on Iraqi police. the soldiers were "rescued" by British troops using extreme force and a media blackout ensued.

In addition to the Salvador option, we have also exposed other US and Israeli policy documents stating that it would be beneficial to the overalk strategy to engender strife in the region.

In 1982, Oded Yinon, an official from the Israeli Foreign Affairs office, wrote: "To dissolve Iraq is even more important for us than dissolving Syria. In the short term, it's Iraqi power that constitutes the greatest threat to Israel. The Iran-Iraq war tore Iraq apart and provoked its downfall. All manner of inter-Arab conflict help us and accelerate our goal of breaking up Iraq into small, diverse pieces."

Ethnic cleansing, maimed children and thousands of dead American soldiers are a small price to pay because for the Globalists the end always justifies the means and untold bloodshed and misery and bloodshed won't stand in their way.

That agenda was again underscored recently when Daniel Pipes, a highly influential Straussian Neo-Con media darling, who told the New York Sun that a civil war would aid the US and Israel because it would entangle Iran and Syria and enable those countries to be picked off by the new world empire without the need to sell a direct invasion to the public.

Stephen Zunes, professor of Politics and chair of the Peace & Justice Studies Program at the University of San Francisco, recently wrote,

"Top analysts in the CIA and State Department, as well as large numbers of Middle East experts, warned that a U.S. invasion of Iraq could result in a violent ethnic and sectarian conflict. Even some of the war's intellectual architects acknowledged as much: In a 1997 paper, prior to becoming major figures in the Bush foreign policy team, David Wurmser, Richard Perle, and Douglas Feith predicted that a post-Saddam Iraq would likely be "ripped apart" by sectarianism and other cleavages but called on the United States to "expedite" such a collapse anyway."

"One of the long-standing goals of such neoconservative intellectuals has been to see the Middle East broken up into smaller ethnic or sectarian mini-states, which would include not only large stateless nationalities like the Kurds, but Maronite Christians, Druze, Arab Shi'ites, and others. Such a policy comes not out of respect for the right of self-determination � indeed, the neocons have been steadfast opponents of the Palestinians' desire for statehood, even alongside a secure Israel � but out of an imperial quest for divide-and-rule. The division of the Middle East has long been seen as a means of countering the threat of pan-Arab nationalism and, more recently, pan-Islamist movements."

The machinations of the Machiavellian's are unfolding according to plan. Let Iraq cascade into chaos and dilute the insurgency by manipulating it to become fractious and watch in-fighting ensue. Blame Iran and Syria for the anarchy (a sentiment echoed by Rice during the cartoon riots) and then move the troops in to decapitate two more rogue nations.

With the news today that nine American troops have been killed in bombings and combat, raising to 67 the number of U.S. troops killed in October, and public support for the war at an all time low, things are only getting worse.

A poll conducted for CNN over the weekend suggests support among Americans for the war in Iraq is dwindling to an all-time low. Just 34 percent of those polled say they support the war, while 64 percent say they oppose it.

Peter Pace, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, also acknowledged over the weekend that the overall strategy in Iraq is under review. Gen. told CNN that military plans, including the linchpin of U.S. exit strategy -- reliance on Iraqi forces to take up the fight -- is being reviewed.

Furthermore, British General Richard Dannatt created a furor last week by saying that British troops should "get ourselves out sometime soon because our presence exacerbates the security problems."

A poll published Sunday said 74 percent of Britons agree with Dannatt's comments. He also won the support of several top newspapers and the British Army. Despite this overwhelming support, Dannatt was the subject of a vicious Whitehall whispering campaign as Labour ministers furious at his devastating outburst over Iraq called for him to be sacked.

A new study published by The Lancet also emerged in the past week, estimating that 655,000 Iraqis, the vast majority of them innocent civilians, have been killed as a result of the bombing and occupation of Iraq.

However, Bush would have the world believe that it is us, the war critics that are "Propagandizing," and "engaging In "Illogical Behavior". Likewise for the rest of his cronies who still go around telling everyone that being in Baghdad is �like being in Manhattan.�

The AP also reported this week that reconstruction funds are drying up, that is the funds that did not go missing or were just wasted away, and America's big builders are pulling out, leaving completed projects and unfulfilled plans in the hands of an Iraqi government unprepared to manage either.

The only excuse for not withdrawing troops with immediate effect is that the situation has become so bad that it is a catch 22 dilemma. This is hogwash. The real reason troops will stay in Iraq is nothing to do with protecting the Iraqi people or the "fledgling democracy", it is purely about geopolitical and strategic positioning. It's about an aggressive occupying force setting up base and being in position for it's next target.

The myth that the occupation is about liberating the Iraqi people is now a known lie. Iraq is now a total and complete military police state, where the "liberated" people enjoy virtually no fundamental human rights. This so called freedom under occupation makes Saddam Hussein look like Nelson Mandela in comparison.

The reasoning behind the war has changed half a dozen times. President Bush keeps revising his explanation for why the U.S. is in Iraq, moving from narrow military objectives at first to history-of-civilization stakes now.

In a remark he made last year about the constant attacks on US troops in Iraq, Bush said: "The insurgents are being defeated; that's why they're continuing to fight." This stunning Orwellian reversal of all logic epitomizes the worsening situation in Iraq. Measuring success in terms of how far you are from success. The Straussian ideology in full flow means that the Bush administration in it's own separate logical world actually does legitimately have a reason to remain in Iraq.

The reality is that The Neocon hordes need to stay in Iraq to order to see through their insane Imperialist project for a new American Century, and the only way they can now do this is by practicing violence in the name of fighting violence. We used to be told that terrorists kidnapped and killed people, I guess it becomes moral when the 'authorities' are behind it.
* * *
You can also google Craig Murray and find http://www.craigmurray.co.uk/archives/2005/12/damning_documen.html

Pay attention, folks. Things are not going right on several fronts prompting the need to "change the subject" very soon. The military-industrial-complex, in cahootz with their Neocon/Likudnik enablers, are on the virge of pulling something off.

US NAVAL WAR GAMES OFF THE IRANIAN COASTLINE:
A provocation which could lead to War?
by Michel Chossudovsky

October 24, 2006
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20061024&articleId=3593

There is a massive concentration of US naval power in the Persian Gulf and the Arabian Sea. Three US naval strike groups off the Iranian coastline are deployed: USS Enterprise, USS Eisenhower and USS Iwo Jima Expeditionary Strike Group.

The naval strike groups have been assigned to fighting the "global war on terrorism."

Tehran considers the US war games to be conducted in the Persian Gulf, off the Iranian coastline as a provocation, which is intended to trigger a potential crisis and a situation of direct confrontation between US and Iranian naval forces in the Persian Gulf:

"Reports say the US-led naval exercises based near Bahrain will practise intercepting and searching ships carrying weapons of mass destruction and missiles.

Iran's official news agency IRNA quoted an unnamed foreign ministry official as describing the military manoeuvres as dangerous and suspicious.
Reports say the US-led naval exercises based near Bahrain will practise intercepting and searching ships carrying weapons of mass destruction and missiles.

The Iranian foreign ministry official said the US-led exercises were not in line with the security and stability of the region. Instead, they are aimed at fomenting crises, he said." (quoted in BBC, 23 October 2006)

USS Boxer Expeditionary Strike Group (ESG 5) to arrive in Arabian Sea

The USS Boxer (LHD 4), --which is the flagship for the Boxer Expeditionary Strike Group (ESG 5)-- which left Singapore on October 16, is scheduled to join the three naval strikes groups. ESG 5 is comprised of USS Boxer, Bunker Hill, USS Dubuque (LPD 8), USS Comstock (LSD 45), USS Benfold (DDG 65), and USS Howard (DDG 83). ESG 5 also includes PHIBRON 5, the 15th MEU, Coast Guard Cutter Midgett (WHEC 726).

�We are about to enter a part of the world that can be very dangerous,� said Chief Aviation Ordnanceman (AW/SW) Jacques Beaver, Boxer�s flight deck ordnance chief. �We must be flexible and prepared to defend ourselves from any threats.�

Boxer has been preparing for the weapons upload for two months by completing required maintenance and electronic pre-checks. Checks ensure that the ship�s missile and launching systems are up to standard and safe to load with live ordnance.

�It has taken a lot of hard work for our people to get this done,� said Chief Fire Controlman (SW) William Lewis, combat systems, fire control division�s leading chief petty officer. �You cannot measure the importance of having these defenses guarding the lives of the Sailors and Marines in this strike group.�

BOXESG is comprised of USS Boxer (LHD 4), USS Bunker Hill (CG 52), USS Dubuque (LPD 8), USS Comstock (LSD 45), USS Benfold (DDG 65) and USS Howard (DDG 83). The strike group also includes Amphibious Squadron 5, the 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit, Coast Guard Cutter Midgett (WHEC 726) and Canadian Frigate HMCS Ottawa (FFH 341).

BOXESG is currently conducting operations in support of the global war on terrorism while transiting to the Arabian
Gulf." (http://www.c7f.navy.mil/news/2006/october/3.htm)

USS Boxer

Canada is part of the Expeditonary Strike Group (ESG 5)

Canada is formally participating in this military deployment under the disguise of the "war on terrorism". The Canadian Navy has dispatched Frigate HMCS Ottawa, which is now an integral part of ESG 5, under US Command. It is worth noting that particular emphasis has been given to medical evacuations and combat medical support suggesting that a combat scenario could be envisaged.

Boxer and Ottawa, both operating in the U.S. 7th Fleet area of responsibility, know that they can play a vital role to aid humanitarian assistance operations, medical evacuations or combat medical support that would rely heavily on the medical capabilities of the Boxer strike group. Cross training Sailors from ship to ship helps ensure the success of the strike group should BOXESG have to respond to any medical scenario, according to Richardson.

�Training is a necessary part of any evolution,� said Richardson. �Anytime you�re working with another nation, it�s important that we understand their capabilities just as much as they understand ours, so in the event anything occurs we know where our assets are.�

The cross training also fostered cooperation between the two allies which provided Verville and Boxer corpsmen a forum to learn about each other�s navies and each other�s culture." (Military.com October 2006)

Dangerous Crossroads: Tonkin II?

"An incident" in the Persian Gulf could be used by the US as a pretext for war against Iran.

A war pretext incident, similar to "the Gulf of Tonkin Incident", which triggered the Vietnam war, could be used by US forces, with a view to justifying retaliatory military action against Iran. In August 1964, President Lyndon B. Johnson claimed that North Vietnamese forces had attacked US destroyers in the Gulf of Tonkin. The Tonkin incident, which had been manipulated, contributed to unleashing a full-fledged war against Vietnam:

"A phantom attack on two U.S. destroyers cruising the Gulf of Tonkin was staged by the Pentagon and the C.I.A. The bogus attack occurred early in August, 1964. That evening President Lyndon Johnson went on television giving the grim details of the non-attack. Later, however, it was revealed that navy commander James Stockdale flew cover over the Gulf of Tonkin that night. Stockdale disclosed that U.S. ships were firing at phantom targets�targets that didn�t exist. The Gulf of Tonkin Incident that drew the U.S. into the quagmire of Viet Nam simply didn�t happen. Johnson, as presidents so often do, lied to the American people. The result was the rapid passage of the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which was the sole legal basis for the Viet Nam War. As a result of Johnson�s lie, three million Vietnamese people and fifty eight thousand U.S. soldiers died." (Charles Sullivan, Global Research, January 2006)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ANNEX: US NAVY

Navy Personnel
Active Duty: 349,783

Officers: 51,979

Enlisted: 293,368

Midshipmen: 4,436
Ready Reserve: 131,802 [As of 30 September]

Selected Reserves: 70,500

Individual Ready Reserve: 61,302
Reserves currently mobilized: 5,996 [As of 18 October]
Personnel on deployment: 36,037
Navy Department Civilian Employees: 175,454

Ships and Submarines
Deployable Battle Force Ships: 280

Ships Underway (away from homeport): 133 ships (47% of total)

On deployment: 104 ships (37% of total)

Attack submarines underway
(away from homeport): 22 submarines (40%)

On deployment: 11 submarines (20%)
Ships Underway

Carriers:
USS Kitty Hawk (CV 63) - Philippine Sea
USS Enterprise (CVN 65) - Persian Gulf
USS Nimitz (CVN 68) - Pacific Ocean
USS Dwight D.Eisenhower (CVN 69)- Mediterranean Sea
USS Ronald Reagan - Pacific Ocean

Iwo Jima Expeditionary Strike Group (ESG):
USS Iwo Jima (LHD 7) - Persian Gulf
USS Nashville (LPD 13) - Persian Gulf
USS Whidbey Island (LSD 41) - Persian Gulf

Boxer Expeditionary Strike Group (ESG):
USS Boxer (LHD 4) - Indian Ocean
USS Dubuque (LPD 8) - Indian Ocean
USS Comstock (LSD 45) - Indian Ocean

Essex Expeditionary Strike Group (ESG):
USS Essex (LHD 2) - South China Sea
USS Juneau (LPD 10) - South China Sea
USS Harpers Ferry (LSD 49) - South China Sea

Amphibious Warfare Ships:
USS Tarawa (LHA 1) - Pacific Ocean
USS Saipan (LHA 2) - Persian Gulf
USS Wasp (LHD 1) - port visit, Copenhagen, Denmark
USS Kearsarge (LHD 3) - Atlantic Ocean
USS Bataan (LHD 5) - Atlantic Ocean
USS Cleveland (LPD 7) - Pacific Ocean
USS Shreveport (LPD 12) - Atlantic Ocean
USS Ponce (LPD 15) - Atlantic Ocean
USS San Antonio (LPD 17) - Atlantic Ocean
USS Ashland (LSD 48) - Atlantic Ocean
USS Pearl Harbor (LSD 52) - Pacific Ocean

Aircraft (operational): 4000+

currently/or en route in/to Persian Gulf-Arabian Sea
(according to available information)

Winnipegger wrote:
"But, I do think that a cross border incursion, kidnapping of soldiers and then uninterupted artillery fire on PURELY civilian targets DOES justify a war."

As I understand it, Israel had imprisoned several thousand Lebanese CIVILIANS--almost entirely women and children.

Second, you can't "kidnap" soldiers--it's not illegal to take soldiers prisoner.

I'm adamantly FOR the state of Israel.

But when Israel conducts a war against civilian populations, it cannot cite the retaliatory attacks as 'justification' for all-out indiscriminate bombings, etc. It won't wash.

It undermines & contradicts its own claim to a moral cause.

Again, I must emphasize: we have, the U.S. has, an obligation to ensure Israel's continued existence--the events of the 20th Century were incomprehensibly catastrophic.

But there can be no justification for adopting the attitude & methods of those states and terrorists who had visited so much suffering upon the Jewish people for so many years.

It doesn't work; it backfires. It's bad Realpolitik. On that basis alone, it's incredibly incompetent. Continue to use these methods--and you provide a moral cause to your opponents. The U.S. has an obligation to see that Israel doesn't become what it has fought against for so long, if only to head off its complete & wholesale demise. Avoiding escalations would be nice too, though it's not part of Israel's agenda.

There IS NO essentializing moral standing held by ANY one people or nation on this Earth! Moral standing--political or spiritual--comes straight from conduct, from actions, from policy.

If Israel is to have or maintain any substantive standing as a democracy or as a moral actor or as a state with right on its side, or merely with power at its disposal--it has to fulfill its obligation to PROTECT the Palestinian people within its borders. Israel--if it is to have ANY moral standing at all--has an obligation to see that every ethnic/religious group & Palestinians have a political outlet for their concerns and have access to redress of grievances and the protection of the rule of law.

I don't know what is so hard about this. We WANT to stabilize the state of Israel, AND secure its continued existence. But it is 2006, not 1946. We're talking about Palestinians, NOT the German war machine. Germany lost because of their methods, because of the intrinsically amoral/unjustifiable/ & the un-Realpolitik of preemptive war. Germany was reviled because of its methods (& its rejection of justice, of politics)--not because of it's intrinsic status as a people.

Israel also has no recourse to intrinsic moral superiority, either as victim or as chosen people. It'll be measured by its actions and policies.

I understand the impulse to end the cycle of retaliation by retaliating with overwhelming force. Yet it's obviously strengthened Hezbollah, legitimated their leadership/cause, increased their technical capacity.

It's essential that threats to Israel's security come to an end--and soon. Yet Israeili civilians are not martyrs: they also have an obligation to rein in their military. Not simply because they pay a direct price for such policies & military actions. But rather because the people in democracies are directly responsible for the leaders they employ & elect.

IN the final accounting of history, of time, of spirit, what will they tell their children? What will WE tell our children?

That "I had to do it" ?

"It was my job" ?

"I'm a good American" ?

Americans tend to judge a man by his/her actions.

Failing the ends-means test is merely a minimalist measure of what's going on here.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but the topic of Israel has been taboo for far too long.

Any country with America's ability to grapple frankly with difficult issues has the capacity to address the Israel-Palestine issue pragmatically and non-ideologically.

The rhetoric has been way too heated, on either side.

Folks who've attempted to tackle the issue honestly have too often been attacked and marginalized for their supposed 'insensitivities.' And that attitude towards open discussion and the pragmatic politics of democracy has been far too prevalent. It's dealt an enormous setback to U.S. interests in the region, and been a huge liability overall.

That, I think, works in favor of the neocon smash-and-grab agenda--which is ultimately as ineffectual as it is bankrupt in every sense of the word.

RichF & Carroll:

Your Lefty talking-points are the standard blood-libel against Israel. I won't belabor the litinay of lies and will focus on one of RichF's assertion regarding attacking " civilians". I submit:

1) Hassan Fattah, a reporter for the New York Times, interviewed residents of the village of Marwaheen who described how they begged Hezbollah not to use their village as a staging ground for attacks. According to Fattah,
...on Thursday, one of the suspicious white vans was sitting next to the town mosque. The van had apparently been hit by an Israeli missile,but the launching platform for a Katyusha rocket could still be seen inside. A rocket that lay next to the van a few days earlier had been removed.
Elsewhere, villagers showed off a weapons dump that included heavy machine guns, mortar rockets and launchers, and numerous other rockets left behind. Part of the weapons store had been bombed, but a much larger store down the street was intact.
Residents said Hezbollah was using them as human shields. "One man in this village was able to turn all our lives upside down for just a bit of money," Ibrahim said. When the villagers left, he said, the fighters did too, as evidenced by the limited damage done to the town. (New York Times, Aug. 25, 2006)
2) Sabrina Tavernise, also of the New York Times, reported July 28:
"Hezbollah came to Ain Ebel to shoot its rockets," said Fayad Hanna Amar, a young Christian man, referring to his village. They are shooting from between our houses.. . .
Mr. Amar said Hezbollah fighters in groups of two and three had come into Ain Ebel, less than a mile from Bin Jbail, where most of the fighting has occurred. They were using it as a base to shoot rockets, he said, and the Israelis fired back.
One woman, who would not give her name because she had a government job and feared retribution, said Hezbollah fighters had killed a man who was trying to leave Bin Jbail.
3) Jan Egeland, the United Nations humanitarian chief, asserted in a press briefing:
"Consistently, from the Hezbollah heartland, my message was that Hezbollah must stop this cowardly blending. . . among women and children," he said. "I heard they were proud because they lost very few fighters [sic] and that it was the civilians bearing the brunt of this. I don't think anyone should be proud of having many more children and women dead than armed men" (AP, Lauren Frayer, July 24)
4) On Oct. 8, Anthony Shadid of the Washington Post reported:
[Hezbollah] began preparing for a ground war almost from the day Israeli forces left in May 2000. Most of the militiamen were drawn from their villages and kept their weapons at home. [Retired Lebanese general] Abdel-Kader said the town or village became the unit of defense, where other arms were stashed. The towns, in turn, were organized into three or four sectors, with a regional command.
"All the weapons were in the right place," he said. "They didn't need to mobilize."
5) AP correspondent Todd Pittman interviewed residents of the village Marwaheen, who recounted:
Hezbollah fighters in civilian clothes entered the village and set up launchers to fire rockets south into Israel. The guerrillas moved the launchers around, putting one on top of a house that was subsequently destroyed. . . .
A teenage girl who was in Marwaheen for the first three days of the war said she saw a Hezbollah fighter set up a rocket launcher with a timer on a nearby hillside, then run to the other side of the village near her home, taking refuge between civilian houses. Streaks of red crossed the sky as the launcher fired a volley into Israel, and minutes later Israel returned fire and huge explosions tore through the launch site, she said. "We begged them to leave," the girl said, declining to be quoted by name because she feared retribution from Hezbollah. "We told them, 'Get out! We have children here. We don't want anybody to get hurt.' But they ignored us." (Aug. 26)
6) Ze'ev Schiff of Ha'aretz described how Hezbollah enlisted farmers to launch rockets at Israel:
Hezbollah managed to fire a large number of Katyushas during the war - as many as 240 in one day toward the end of the fighting. The rockets, stored near the launch points in underground shelters or houses, were usually aimed with a direction and trajectory precalculated to hit a specific target in Israel. They were usually set up in orchards by arrangement with the grove owners, who were paid by Hezbollah.
The two-by-three-meter positions consisted of a hydraulic launch pad in a lined pit. The pad could be raised to fire the 122-mm rockets from a launcher at its center, and then lowered and camouflaged with vegetation. The farmers received instructions by cell phone regarding the number of rockets to launch and in what direction and range. They were often provided with thermal blankets to cover the position in order to keep IAF aircraft from detecting the post-shooting heat signature. (Sept. 5)
7) For visual evidence of Hezbollah's use of civilian areas, please see the Web site of Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. In addition to photographs and videos, it also contains incriminating excerpts from Canada's National Post and New Yorker Magazine.
Contradicts Himself
Makdisi can't seem to decide whether Israel indiscriminately attacked the entire civilian population, all innocent, or whether Israel singled out a specific religious group. Also, he contradicts himself as to whether or not the population was providing "support" (cover) for Hezbollah:
But the punishment was not evenly distributed. Israel's war was aimed specifically at Lebanon's Shiite population. Shiite neighborhoods in Beirut were destroyed, but other neighborhoods remained untouched. Shiite villages in the south were obliterated - literally wiped from the surface of the Earth - while nearby Christian villages escaped unscathed, mercifully able to shelter their Shiite neighbors.
"Israeli officials said this was a war against Hezbollah, that Hezbollah was hiding in the midst of the population. But this wasn't a war against Hezbollah. It was a war to punish the entire population for its support of the guerillas.
"Not only was Hezbollah not hiding behind civilians, it ought to be obvious that the violence was directed in the first instance at the civilians themselves. To direct such violence at one community, one religious group, one minority - and to deny them the ability to return safely home - was what this war was all about."
Makdisi is right on one point - Christian towns were relatively spared Israel's strikes against Hezbollah because their sympathy for the Shiite terrorist group was much more limited than their Shiite counterparts. Thus, Hezbollah was not as entrenched in Christian locales, and Israel had less reason to target them. In other words, Israel was hitting Hezbollah targets which posed a threat to Israel's civilian population and was not simply "punish[ing] an entire population."
Makes an Outrageous Allegation
Makdisi's outrageous allegation that Shi'ite villages were "literally wiped from the surface of the Earth" requires substantiation. What villages? By what means were the villages supposedly "wiped from the surface of the Earth"? Does he claim that all of the inhabitants were killed and every building destroyed? If none is forthcoming, a correction is in order.
Repeats Debunked Figures for Lebanese Casualties
Makdisi parrots the common media charge that "The vast majority of the 1,200 Lebanese killed by Israeli bombardments were civilians; one in three was a child."
This frequently repeated figure is apparently based on Hezbollah assertions that it lost up to 80 fighters. But as the Daily Telegraph reported:
Although Hizbollah has refused to make public the extent of the casualties it has suffered, Lebanese officials estimate that up to 500 fighters have been killed in the past three weeks of hostilities with Israel, and another 1,500 injured.
"Lebanese officials have also disclosed that many of Hizbollah's wounded are being treated in hospitals in Syria to conceal the true extent of the casualties. They are said to have been taken through al-Arissa border crossing with the help of Syrian security forces. . . .
"Hizbollah's operational council has drawn up casualty lists that have been passed to the Shaheed Foundation. Copies have been seen by the Daily Telegraph, and have also been obtained by Lebanese newspapers, which have been pressured by Hizbollah not to publish them. ' Hizbollah is desperate to conceal its casualties because it wants to give the impression that it is winning its war,' said a senior security official. 'People might reach a very different conclusion if they knew the true extent of Hizbollah's casualties." (Con Coughlin, Aug. 4, emphasis added)
Additionally, on Aug. 22, Patrick Bishop of the Daily Telegraph reported:
"UN officials believe that Hizbollah will not want to reignite the conflict, at least for a while. The organisation's culture of secrecy has disguised the true number of its casualties--funerals of 'martyrs' are being staggered to soften the impact of the losses. Some were interred without ceremony for re-burial later. An UN official estimated the deaths at 500, 10 per cent of the force Hizbollah is thought to muster."
Israeli sources, and a few non-Israeli sources, including the Kuwait Times, reported that up to 700 Hezbollah fighters were killed. The Israelis claim to have identified by name some 440 Hezbollah fighters and estimate at least 200 others were killed.
Despite Hezbollah attempts to cover up the extent of its losses by, for instance, concealing funerals, a tally of press reports on fighters' funerals confirm that Hezbollah fighters suffered many more casualties than the 80 frequently cited. See CAMERA's full analysis and detailed list of these funerals, as well as a flash presentation summarizing the issue. In short, if Hezbollah's losses are as high as 700, it is blatantly false to claim that the "vast majority" of the 1,200 casualties were civilians.
Makdisi's Op-Ed is not the first time that the Los Angeles Times has printed the specious charge that the majority of Lebanese casualties were civilians. When challenged earlier by CAMERA, the paper failed to provide substantiation for reporter Raed Rafei's claim as fact that "1,200 Lebanese, mainly civilians" were killed in the recent war between Israel and Hezbollah ("Hezbollah Holds Beirut Rally," Sept. 23). It is unconscionable that, despite the vast evidence that CAMERA has provided the Readers Representative disputing Rafei's allegation, the paper has not only failed to substantiate its news report, but also repeats it.

Say 'goodbye', Winnipeger (please).

Points well made, Carroll & POA.

Posted by Easy E at October 25, 2006 01:16 AM

Why should I say goodbye? because I disagree with several of you? Would you rather talk amongst yourselves, everyone in agreement? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of an internet forum?

RichF:

OK. One more..

"Israel also has no recourse to intrinsic moral superiority, either as victim or as chosen people. It'll be measured by its actions and policies."

Such as dropping warning-leaflets on the Hiz-fortified villages prior to air assaults on military infrastructure

Such as phoning the homes of Islamic Jihad and HAMAS loyalsts warning them to leave so that wepons storage and illegal tunnels can be destroyed

Such as literally sending weapons to the PLO's Force 17 to protect Abbas

Such as taking wounded Hizballah combatants to Isreali hospitals for medical attention ( need I address how IDF wounded would be treated?)

Such as the imperative of a nation to militarily react to overt acts of war. I know that you on the Left apply a double-standard to Isreal, imploring it to adhere to a higher moral-authority. If these Islamic terrorists are seeking to become Shahids, let them aspire to their imperative.

Winnipeger:

Do not expect resoned fact-based discourse from these so-called Progressives. They lack the depth of intellectual capacity to move beyond their Isreal-slander moveon / ANSWER talking-points. They scour the Guardian and Counterpunch for the most outragous Isreal-slnder to toss-about. They do not tolerate external ideas nor any data points that undermine their fragile construct of cognative dissonance. They would prefer to rant to each other and tell each other how enlightened and global they are in their secular perspective of the world. They are no more than apologists for terroists.

...And what really amazes me is that apparently, Carro, The Pissed Off American and many other critics have never even been to Israel or the Territories!

talk about the uninformed opinions. The truth as they (don't) see it. A while back, when I was still lurking, Carroll even had the audacity to back up one of her claims by citing an Aryan Nation website and news outlet!

I guess you may be right; when it comes to the anti-Israel crowd there is too often NO room for other opinions.

The only good news is that Carrol, the Pissed Off Person and others of their ilk are probably ineffectual cranks hammering away at home on their keyboards.

Winnipeger:

Typical of "enlightened" anti-semites, they are seeking simple solutions to complex issues. I also have seen references cited that tarck-back to the StormFront.org. A Nazi web site.

As usual, when fear strikes the simple-minded, they strike-out at the usual scape goats. Scratch a Progressive and you'll find a neo-fascist.

Why should I say goodbye? because I disagree with several of you? Would you rather talk amongst yourselves, everyone in agreement? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of an internet forum?

Posted by Winnipeger

You should say goodbye because your useless horseshit is nothing but pro-Israeli propaganda (lies). Note how you avoided the issue of Israeli bulldozing of Palestinian farmlands and orchards, as well as the fact that Israel littered the Lebanese countryside with hundreds of thousands of cluster bomblets IN SPITE OFF of the fact that a ceasefire was imminent. Instead, you just despicably justified the wholesale terrorizing of the Palestinian people by labeling the Israeli sound bomb tactics as "just sonic booms". Then you lied about it by stating that such a tactic has not been used by Israel, despite the fact that Israeli military spokesmen have ADMITTED that the tactic has been used. THATS why you should leave, because you are a LIAR, and will say ANYTHING in order to back Israeli policy. I loathe liars. And I loathe the kind of human trash that will advocate positions they KNOW to be untrue just to advance a political viewpoint, or to spread propaganda. To top it off, now you are drooling that "anti-semitism" crap you lying fanatics always turn to when losing a debate.

Kiss my ass.

Those pesky, progressive, fragile constructs of cognative dissonance from the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide. They always seem to get in the way of the slash and burn, scorched-earth types. Funny how those constructs condemn Hizbollah to the same degree.

RichF thanks for the perspective on the expeditionary forces moving in the Arab gulf.

"RichF thanks for the perspective on the expeditionary forces moving in the Arab gulf."

That would be EasyE, but RichF thank you for your unapologetic secular perspective as well.

POA, the UN and human rights groups are claiming Israel fired "up to four million cluster bombs into Lebanon..." And, "UN de-mining experts say up to one million of the cluster bombs failed to explode immediately and continue to threaten civilians, especially children who can mistake the ordnance for batteries or other small objects."

http://tinyurl.com/y2lruf

Uzi wrote:

"Your Lefty talking-points are the standard blood-libel against Israel."

My comments are neither left-of-center nor do they come anywhere near "blood-libel." I focused solely on the actions--not an essentialized or labeled intrinsic character--and dealt only with state actions, not religious or ethnic identity.

You owe me an apology. And you owe it for both the accusation and for your dishonest mischaracterization.

It's precisely your shrill tone, your erroneous attacks, and your demonization of reasonable fact-based discussion that has made the topic of Israel taboo. It's the third-rail of foreign policy.

Uzi--and anyone who chooses a gun as pseudonym hasn't got moderation as an ally--you misread both my point and the facts at hand. Israel's PRIOR treatment of civilian Palestinians self-deals enormous setbacks to its moral, political, and military objectives. Having imprisoned (as I understand it) thousands of women & children civilians from Hezbollah/Lebanon PRIOR to the latest flare-up leaves little or no room for complaints. Indiscriminate bombing of prove Israel's only too willing to make war NOT on an army, but on an entire people, civilians included. Civilian targets were bombed. It's entirely beside the point that Hezbollah soldiers were among the population they were trying to protect. The British military cried and whined when George Washington hid among the populace and drew support for them, and I have no doubt he was referred to as a terrorist too.

Yet its entirely unreasonable to expect anyone anywhere to come out of the woods and stand in the Boston Commons to be murdered in cold blood. Taking refuge where one can when fighting for a just cause is not cowardice, but prudence. It's appropriately known as effective military tactics. If you don't like the playing field, move the contest to the political battlefield--where Israel's interests, survival, security, and redemption lies.

Hezbollah hugely increased its support among Lebanese civilians during the latest conflict. They improved their hand as legitimate political leaders in any number of respects, and it takes little work for you to figure that out.

Pissed Off American,

Congratulations on destroying another thread on this blog.

If I Was the host, I'd surely ask YOU too say goodbye. If Mr. Clemmons tolerates your presence unchecked, it is to the detriment of his blog. I'm just a random Canadian who linked to this site after Steve was quoted in our local paper. I find it quite objectionable to be vilified in such a way by people such as yourself and Carroll.

You say I'm full of horseshit and worse?! carroll writes that she wants to, "Rip the intestines out of these blooding sucking Israeli parasites and neo pond scum and shoving them down their throats." this only demonstartes your lack of humanity AND intelligence.

By the way, I already addressed my opinion about the issue and rationale for the use of cluster bombs in South lebanon. If you choose to ignore it and attack me over and over again in return, you demonstarte your own idiocy.

further your numbers are way off. the UN estimates that there are 100,000 unexploded bomblets, and the death from these ordinances through september 14 was 12 with 61 injured. War sucks, but every country has a right and a responsibility to defend its borders. In addition, cluster bombs are legal weapons used by many military forces in combat, including the U.S. and Britain.

http://tinyurl.com/ymm7jp

Also, there is a BIG difference between "sound bombs" as you refer to them and sonic booms. I never claimed to know everything about everything (unlike you and Carroll) and if I have erred I have erred NOT lied.

But maybe you and Carrol (and others) will answer my question about whether or not you have EVER visited the region that you claim to know EVERYTHING about!

HAVE YOU EVER BEEN TO ISRAEL, THE OCCUPIED TERRITORIES, LEBANON, EGYPT, etc??????????

PLEASE ANSWER THIS SIMPLE QUESTION BEFORE CONTINUING YOUR VILE PERSONAL ATTACKS!!!

And when someone cites stormfront.org to justify their position, should we not assume that person is anti-semitic? DO you really think it's an unjustified leap in logic to assume that they are??

BUT, AGAIN, PISSED OFF, CAROL AND OTHERS, HAVE YOU EVER BEEN TO THE MIDDLE EAST?? AND IF SO, WHERE???

Evil acts are attributable to both sides. Each act is trumpeted as a response to some other act. Both sides are right. Both sides are wrong.

So we have rationlized madness.

We need a parent to stop these violent children from fighting each other and literally drawing the entire world into their playpen of Hell.

Help!

Winnipeger,

Is it requisite to have "BEEN TO" places where atrocities and crimes were committed? Have you been to Hiroshima, Nagasaki, the Killing Fields of Vietnam & Cambodia, Rwanda & Burundi, etc., etc. Have you been to the cluster-bombed neighborhoods of Beirut, experienced life OUTSIDE the Green Zone in Baghdad? Have you been to Falluja and seen the glorious regentrification U.S. forces bestowed upon this community with depleted uranium, etc.? http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article10907.htm

Get real.

"enlightened" anti-semites--

once can't escape the labelling that goes with the terrain of offering a balanced perspective on israel related issues.. oh, and you must go their in order to have a balanced view as well, or be jewish, lol..

Israel Admits Using Phosphorus Bombs in Lebanon
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/777549.html

Does this mean Ha