Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Right, but did Lebanon attack Israel? Are you equating Hezbollah with the Lebanese government?
But I agree even less. I don't think nation states get to destroy civilian infrastructure of another nation to retaliate against the aggression of some group operating from its territory. This kind violence against a people for something they have little control over is inexcusable. And yes, Hezbollah's aggression is also inexcusable. And I don't see how subjecting the people of another nation to this kind of violence is any more acceptable than if it were to occur within a nation state.
by someone (s0me1smail(a)gmail(d)com) on Sat Jul 29th, 2006 at 02:08:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]
While Lebanon did not itself attack Israel, you have to recognize the complexity of this matter, considering Hizbollah is now a part of the Lebanese government, and Lebanon has made very little (if any) effort to involve the international community to re-occupy its own southern borders with regular military. Hizbollah attacking Israel from Lebanon is not the same as the ETA or IRA. They are a militia force with intelligence units, soldiers, modern weapons, bunkers, and other elements of a huge infrastructure.

It is absolutely inexcusable to destroy any civilian infrastructure. And I wish Israel would stop being so goddamn stupid when it comes to that. But if a road or a bridge is being used by Hizbollah to carry weapons, does this now become a military target or still a civilian infrastructure? These are not easy questions to answer, but I think you have to appreciate this thought process.

Mikhail from SF

by Tsarrio (dj_tsar@yahoo.com) on Sat Jul 29th, 2006 at 04:16:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]
If Hezbollah symphatizers started clubbing Israeli soldiers to death with frozen baguettes, should all bakeries and freezer retailers in Lebanon become military targets and be destroyed?
by Alex in Toulouse on Sat Jul 29th, 2006 at 08:46:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I think you are making ridicule of a very serious issue. You are describing something that is completely not realistic to try to make a point about something that is happening all the time. There are things that are reasonable and things that are unreasonable. I'm not defending Israel's actions (at least not all the time), but if I was getting bombed, you bet your ass I would want to cut off the supply of those bombs and communications infrastructure that makes it possible. It was Hizbollah's choice to use civilian roads, just like it is Hizbollah's choice to put rocket launchers inside mosques, hide inside civilian buildings all the while aiming their rockets not at the Israeli military but civilian targets inside the country.

Mikhail from SF
by Tsarrio (dj_tsar@yahoo.com) on Sat Jul 29th, 2006 at 11:45:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I'm making ridicule about it because it is ridiculous, Let's look at it more closely and see if there really is an intruder in the following examples:

"They're using roads, let's destroy the roads.", "They're using frozen baguettes, let's destroy bakeries". , "They're hiding inside coal cellars, let's put fire to all coal cellars", "They're using a UNESCO world heritage 3rd century minaret to spot for their mortar, let's destroy the minaret". "They're hiding inside ambulances, let's destroy ambulances". , "They're using olive oil to make munitions, let's burn olive oil depots".

Your initial example was a bridge being used to carry weapons ... well let me tell you, if the same bridge is being used to carry bread to civilians, then blowing it up is heartless, not "militarily useful". Even with no bridge, weapons can be ferried across, for instance on inflated rubber ducks (or inflatable Pamela Andersons, or using ropes and pulleys). But there always will be a far greater need for bread than for weapons, and since rubber ducks are limited, the civilians will get screwed ...

Military "tactics" are just things that idiotic officers learn from former idiotic officers, they serve little purpose but to make it harder for civilians. Look at all the bridges the US blew up when invading Iraq, what difference has it made on the long term? Fortunately these were rebuilt, but who's going to rebuild Lebanon this time? Winning idiotic wars is about quantity of firepower, not about blowing up bridges. Leave the bridges alone.

This was a message from the Mostar Bridge Fan Club Association.

by Alex in Toulouse on Sun Jul 30th, 2006 at 04:52:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Note to self: on second thought I doubt there is such a thing as a 3rd century minaret.
by Alex in Toulouse on Sun Jul 30th, 2006 at 05:11:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]


Top Diaries

Democracy on trial

by IdiotSavant - Feb 14

A Special Place in Hell

by Frank Schnittger - Feb 14

Ingeniería Una Revolución

by Oui - Feb 7


by Frank Schnittger - Jan 31

Black-Ops Mercenaries On the Internet

by Oui - Jan 31

Occasional Series