IAP Political Forum

The exchange is taking place as I write this post, however, it is not the two Israeli soldiers captured last year, nor Samir Kuntar.

Israel and Lebanon to exchange prisoners (http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5iEM9TU4gDRcpETcwg-bpaH17Q0nQ)


I tried to explain many times how the prisoner exchange(and bodies) is the only way to free people or recover the dead bodies on both sides of the border, how it has always been the case and probably always will be until a certain agreement is reached to free all prisoners on both sides.

In this article there is a summary of the history of such operations.


The abduction of the soldiers last year was to exchange them with 3 prisoners, one of them is Kantar. Personally I couldn’t care less about Kantar, but I can’t keep wondering which price was the heaviest: releasing him for the two prisoners, or waging a war that killed around 1500 on both sides and cost millions of dollars?

Nasrallah said from the start that Hizbullah abducted the soldiers specifically for an exchange of prisoners and not as an act of war, based on precedence. They did the same thing and expected the same result.

We are witnessing today another example of such procedure.

My debating always was why suddenly Israel decided to wage a full-fledge war last year for a procedure that has been going on for decades?

And why they are accepting to swap prisoners today?

For the simple reason that the Israeli regime had been planning this war for months in advance, waitig for a provocation, as admitted by the head of the israeli regime himself.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/834549.html

the Bushist NeoCon regime, of course, praised the Israeli killing machine all the way untill all the lebanese infrastructures were destroyed, 1500 civilians killed, and the stage was set for an internal lebanese civil war.



 

old timer alert

What do you think about this exchange md? What is the reaction in Israel?

I think it's a good start. Maybe soon you will get the soldiers back.

As for Ron Arad, do you think he is still alive? I mean it's been 20 years already   :-\

Ok,
I understand this is the way things have worked there forever.  I really have no doubt Hizbollah took the soldiers for an exchange and expected business as usual, but kidnapping foreign soldiers is still an act of war.  You can't cross a border, kidnap soldiers, then play innocent when it provokes a stronger reaction than you are used to.  That would be like a robber going into a bank with a gun, then after people get shot in his shoot out with the gaurd, he says, well, it's the gaurd's fault, they just gave in every other time I robbed a bank.

Perhaps Isreal was frustrated and trying to change the opperating paradigm in the reagion.  Clearly if that was their intent, they failed.

Okay, maybe I'm missing something here, but if i'm not mistaken, Lebanon was DEVASTATED after the most recent war with Israel. That war with Hezbollah, while maybe not a military victory for Israel, was not a military loss either and Hezbollah will think twice before invading Israel again. You guys have said so yourself, Hezbollah did not expect the consequences they received for their actions. Well they will now. The precedent is there and if Hezbollah wants to be the political power that it looks like they are striving to be, they will have to second guess another invasion, or they will be held accountable by the people because of the devastation which Israel will either threaten or bring.

Actually, you both are missing something.

1- The analogy with the bank robbery does not stand Gomper. The fact is that Hizbullah did not kidnap Israeli soldier just for the sake of kidnapping them. They had a reason and that is to swap them with other prisoners. There is no other way to get their prisoners back.

2- Israel as much as Hizbullah, takes actions that could be considered acts of war. For example, even after last year's war, their aviation still invades Lebanon's air space on almost a daily basis. Israel has many times kidnapped Lebanese people sitting in their homes, some on suspicion and totally not related to Hizbullah. They would disappear for a year or so in Israeli prisons then come back, last month, Israeli air force openly attacked Syria. Like it or not, the reality around here is different and Israel doesn't play by the rules either.

3- Zenter, as I said, Hizbullah has no intention to invade Israel. We didn't need last year's war to know that. They want an exchange of prisoners. Give them their prisoners and they don't want anything from Israel except make sure they don't occupy their lands again. As I said, there is a lot more provocation coming from Israeli side. Which is worse: Hizbullah kidnapping soldiers to exchange them with other prisoners, or Israel bombing Syria? Does this justify a total devestation of Israel by Syria?

Anyway, what happened with the prisoner swap means that Hizbullah can be negociated with and can be trusted to deliver.

Personally, I think the prisoner they are asking for is not worth the trouble since he is a murderer. But Israel did once promise to deliver him in exchange for information about Ron Arad so they are not totally opposed to setting him free.

As for Ron Arad, I think Israel should ask themselves why Hizbullah needed to kidnap two soldiers for the swap if they could have exchanged him for mere information about Ron Arad. IMHO, I think Hizbullah don't have him or know what happened to him, or he is dead and Hizbullah doesn't have the body. Remember in 1986, Hizbullah wasn't what it is now, and everyone was armed in Lebanon. He could have been taken prisoner by someone else and Hizbullah could be playing a card they don't have. There could be other scenarios too. I hope Arad is alive, but I wouldn't bet on it.

Cedar,
It does not matter WHY Hezbollah kidnapped the soldiers, I already said I don't doubt they did if just for the exchange.  It is still an act of war.  Like with every other act, acts of war have reasons, but is still is an act of war, and you should be prepared for consequences.

Do you really care WHY Israel violates Lebanese airspace or kidnaps Lebanese Civilians?  Do you care why they bombed Syria?  And yes, these are acts of war, and should the Lebanese army or the Syrians attack Israel in response, they would be silly to act innocently offended.  You and I know that those are unlikely scenarios due to the preponderance of force available to Israel, so they can afford to play the ratchet-up of force game farther than most of her neighbors.  So really, viewed that way, it becomes a matter of perspective, so one would ask, did they go off the deep end and way over react last year, or have they shown great restraint over the past several?  Just depends on how you want to look at it.

So one dead Israeli is worth one live and two dead Lebanese?

based on market activities, that would appear to be the going rate...

one dead Israeli that committed suicide (jumped to the sea) and his body got to Lebanese coast where friendlies took his body to fridge for better times,,,

then westerns wonder why Israelis cannot make any peace with Arabs,,, they never want peace but to get the most profit of it,,, it's Middle Eastern thing,,, Israelis bit different since many of them European born in last 3 generations,,,

Look on Cedar she sells her nation as good product when it's shite inside,,, you buy it with all the crap anyone of us can say about his own country,,, saleppl ,,, bazaar... turban,,,

You may be right. On the other hand, looked from yet another perspective, it is not logical to have a bully for a neighbor supported by the international community no matter what they do and then judge people who try to stand up to them with the means available to them.

What bothers me is not what Israel does or doesn't do. They are here and they have the right to fight and react the way they see fit. Many times I said they are a party to the conflict so they cannot always be considered victims acting in self-defense. The opposite is also true. Sometimes they ARE justified in fighting and attacking others. They are like every other party to conflict, sometimes they attack and sometimes they react to attacks.

I think the problem around here is more related to the insane and unfair support to Israel by the international community than to what Israel does per se.

I mean. last year two soldiers were kidnapped by a militant group, not an official army and Israel destroyed half of Lebanon. When asking for a cease fire, Rice, not Olmert, said it is not time for cease fire and we kept hearing about weapons being sent to Israel to contiue fighting.

On September 2007, last month, Israel, an offical army and state, launches an attack on Syria. Where was the reaction of the international community? Do I really care about Syria? No, not really. Do I really care that Israeli warplanes keep flying in the Lebanese skies. Yep, but there isn't much I can do about it. Do I really care about Samir Kuntar. Not at all. I care a lot more about the Lebanese in Syrian prisons.

The question is: Why is Israel the only one protected around here? And why are they the only ones allowed to do acts of war and get away with it? OK, maybe Syria and Lebanon can't do anything about it, but where is the outrage of the international community when Israel does the attacking?

If you really want to understand why Arabs resent the West, it is because they see you as a party to the conflict, on the enemy's side. They see you as enemy by association and nothing is being done to show them they are wrong. So when you get attacked, in their perspective, they are attacking an enemy. Why don't they ever attack Japan or China?

As a member of a Christian minority, I live in the conflict without actually being partial to either Israel or the Muslims (Sunnis or Shiites). I am a bystander living inside the conflict. It makes you see things differently. I don't care about either party, that is why I can't stand suicide bombers or unfair Israeli parctices towards neighboring countries. But if you have a little ounce of human justice, you simply can't miss the double standards applied. It makes one sick.

Actually this is one of Israel's weaknesses that is being used by Hizbullah for each prisoner exchange.

I think this is a religious thing for the Jews, to bury their dead according to certain rites otherwise the dead won't rest in peace or something  ??? Even when there are explosions, they try to get the whole body  :-\

Besides, the Israeli government needs to show that they care about their citizens. Whereas from Hizbullah's side, it is whatever they can get. In such exchanges, Hizbullah is in a better position than Israel. They can ask for more and put their conditions.

So blame it on your religious freaks and your government. No one put a gun on your head to make the swap.

Israelis not at all different. Except maybe they are bigger bullies.


Really now??? Would you take the word of an Israeli for it?

Date: October 14, 2007

Israeli tourist held in Lebanon jail recounts two-week ordeal  (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/912601.html)

Cedar,
The answer to your question is a simple one.  The reason that the west supports Israel so heavily in comparison to the Arabs in that conflict is that we cannot find a partner on the other side.  When we do, we pounce on the chance.  Look at the history of the conflict.  A number of times the Arabs tried to wipe Israel off the Map, the most recent and serious was in 1973.  Look at that example.  The west, notably the United States, sent arms to Israel and helped them to get the upper hand.  But what happend when Israel then tried to exploit that position and destroy the Egyptian 3rd army in the Sinai?  The US pulled in the reins and made the Israelis actually comply with the cease fire.

Look, in general I believe the west would love to be even handed in this conflict.  The problem is, we go to the Israelis, and they have a stance like "well, we want to live in peace, and will settle here or there, we are ok with the Palestinians having a state with such and such restrictions"... OK, we can live with much of that, will need to work on some.

So we go to the Arab side and look for someone to negotiate with.  Here is historically what we have heard  "we would just like to wipe Israel off the map and drive the jews into the sea."  How do you even begin to work with and support people with that position?  If we can get an Arab state off of that position, we work with them and assist them, as we did with Egypt in '79.  It is no coinsidence that Israel and Egypt have been the number one and two recipients of US foreign aid since that time.

And of course the Arabs see this as the west siding with their enemies and persecuting them.  So from a western perspective, we see two choices - 1) be seen by the Arab world as evil always support Israel zionist imperialists or 2) help the Arabs bring about the destruction of Israel.

What most of us in the west would really, really, really like is a third option.  But folks much smarter than I have been looking for that for about 60 years.

And here is another link:

Daniel Sharon: Beirut is the Paris of the ME (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1191257291493&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull)



Please Jane refrain from commenting on a country you have never visited.

We both live in countries at war, but we seem to be taking it much much better than you  ;)

I can see what you're saying but I believe this too oversimplified to be accurate.

When you say Israel is willing to do things, it is willing to have peace according to its conditions.

Let me explain. Take for example the war between Lebanon and Israel.

Israel is willing to make peace with Lebanon on the condition that the Palestinians in Lebanon give up on their right of return.

Lebanon is also willing to have peace with Israel, on the condition that the refugees retain their right of return.

Either party willing to give up on their demand will seal the deal.

Will Israel accept the Palestinians back in return for peace? No they won't.

Settling the Palestinians in Lebanon is roughly equal to wiping Lebanon off the map. Why should we accept?

The question is: Why is Israel supported in this issue but not Lebanon? Why is everything being done to settle the Palestinians in Lebanon whereas no one requests any compromise from Israel in this matter?

Would Israel choose a peace that requires genuine compromise, or would it prefer war if peace came at its expenses? I am willing to bet they would prefer war, same as everyone else.

They are not after peace, they are after peace 100% their way, else it's war. You can only have such peace if you have destroyed your enemies to the point where they can't negotiate anything, which is something that hasn't happened yet. Hence it's war, except with countries where dictator regimes were set and supported to give them peace. This worked so well that the US has been trying to do the same in Lebanon for two years by supporting the Siniora government in return for everything they want. Since in Lebanon, dictatorships cannot work even if supported by the whole world, unless the US changes its policy soon, we are headed for disaster.

So you see, no matter how you put it, whether Israel, Lebanon or the Arabs, some things you can give up in return for peace, and others you can't because the cost is too high. The peace being offered now is too expensive for the Arabs. Make the same offer to Israel and their reply will be the same.

The problem in the ME, as Kissinger termed it, is that of an additional people. This has to be solved and no one is willing to move and give up their claim to the land in return for peace. This is not only the stance of the Arabs, but also of the Israelis. The conflict howevre, is only shown from the Israeli point of view.

Cedar,
You are correct of course, there are peripheral issues where compromise is possible, but then you get down to the core issues and neither side is willing to compromise.  You view the refusal of return for the refugees as a coup de grace to Lebanon, and Isreal sees a return of them as a defacto coup de grace to them.  Makes it really tough to get someone to compromise.  As I said, people smarter than I have been working on this for decades.
Personally, I would prefer the west put more pressure on Israel to be more even handed, but there is not much political will for that, and as long as Israel can play the victim (which it gets tons of help doing with the constant rocket attacks and less constant suicide bombings) there never will be.


As to this bit with this Israeli Daniel Sharon, I don't get that.  I can understand he was arrested, and so he would be bitter and angry toward Lebanon, but calling Berut the "Paris of the Middle East", that is just down right mean.    :P

The problem is we are being pressured into being the ones to cave and this for the past 30 years. Even today, this is the real reason for the support given by the Bush administration to the Siniora government. The Sunnis are not against the settlement of Sunni Palestinians  ;) Hizbullah and the Christians are which is creating internal conflict within Lebanon that may get out of hand. So you see now? US policy towards Lebanon is actually by being a party to the conflict once again, not a referee.

All use the means available to them. This is not restricted to Israel. Last year, Hizbullah played the victim card well and the Israelis went nuts as this was their territory  ;D


Yeah...How dare he?  :D :laugh:

you can lie to Americans who wouldn't even check what you blab in here... Sharon is German citizen and Germans were those who pressed your arse to release some gay who got arrested just for having Israeli relatives...

sure you taking it better,,, i would say you taking more of it... and it will remain the same,,,

this is why most of your posts sound like fockin cry,,, this ain't soap opera,,,


now shush ,,,

Soooo...this is how it works, eh?

Israeli when it suits you, European when it doesn't?

Why are you so upset? Aren't most of you Europeans who happened to have some Jew in the family tree?

Besides, the point is, he is NOT Lebanese and he speaks more fondly of Lebanon than I do.

So...you shush. Jealousy is a bad trait. You will have a country people will like someday too...that is if you don't give up and leave  :-*

lol,,, you are sad,,,

you are too young to be on a political forum :)

cedar how u been... and nice layout guys very nice new forum

and you are too Arab

When will Arab countries in that region stop blaming Israel and start taking responsibility for their own actions.  The war wasn't started by Israel, if you keep poking a cornered dog with a stick he will eventually attack you. The earlier prison swap only let 450 thugs loose to run a mock some probably took part in provoking last years conflict. Sadly, its a never ending game, because people in that region do not know how to truly live in peace.

When will israel stop acting like a terrorist state so can other neighbouring countries stop considering it as a threat??

also 450 thugs??? maybe... but what about and held without trials???

http://www.fidh.org/article.php3?id_article=1894


you are too jew :)

Cedar,
Personaly, I don't care for the two Israeli Soldiers, but what price was the heaviest? Realeasing these two ground soldiers or thousands of lebanese (most of them Hezbullah's supporters)deaths, billions dollars of damages, half of Labanon devastated and over 600 Hezbulla soldiers dead?
Who made the worse calculation?

Seruousely, Do you realy think Israel will accept kidnaping-for-prisoner-swap forever?
Yes, that can work, one, two, ten, twenty times. But it never works everytime.

I'm not saying Israel's reaction was a good one. Just saying that abducting soldiers triggers either a prisoner swap or a military response. Why you and Hezbullah (or should I say "Hezbullah and you"?) thought there can be only prisoner swaps?

What was bad was not that the response was military: That's normal by any standard. But the way the military response was handled.