Thursday, July 20, 2006

Moderate ponderings from Israel-centric perspectives

Discomfort at Harry's:
why didn't Israel rush to provide an explanation for the bombing of a Lebanese milk factory? Was it intentional? If so, why was it considered a vital target at a time of growing food shortages in the country? Is there some way Israel can help assure minimal supplies of food, medicine and other necessities to Lebanon's most vulnerable while continuing the fight against Hezbollah? (Gene)

Fighting the 'wrong' sort of war is not just immoral, it's stupid. (Brownie the Other)
The formidably well informed and eminently decent Head Heeb (a man well worth visiting for quality analysis on almost any issue related to International Law, very moderate, very learned) considers Israeli-Arab victims of Hizbollah attacks and problems with intitial proposals from the UN.

And Yael K suggests that if they could only cooperate Israel and moderate Lebanese should recognise that they share common enemies and gang up on Hizbollah:

The Lebanese position--1. The Lebanese do not like or want Hizbullah in their country2. They don't like it that Hizbullah attacked their neighbor and broke all hell loose3. They want all under-handed Syrian influence out of their country4. Their government and army has been too weak to kick Hizbullah across the Syrian border (or bury them 6 feet under)

The Israeli position--1. The Israelis do not like or want Hizbullah2. They don't like it that Hizbullah attacked them and broke all hell loose3. They want all under-handed Syrian (and Iranian) influence to stop messing about with their country4. They are going to have a very difficult time totally quashing Hizbullah because they are hiding themselves among the Lebanese population centers.

Can I just make a pan-political statement here and assert that, when you sort the wood from the chaff, the quality and breadth of analysis coming from the blogs in relation to this conflict is comfortably putting the MSM to shame...

7 comments:

Pat said...

"the quality and breadth of analysis coming from the blogs in relation to this conflict is comfortably putting the MSM to shame..."

Totally agree. And it is always so with Iraq and Guantanamo.

Take the "Bush lied people died" MSM canard that is now a given in relation to WMD in Iraq. Even though WMD have been found more than justifying the initial invasion as far as getting that message out, Bush has failed. So as far as the public is informed they believe that the initial premise was not only wrong but a lie.

And given what Sheridan says today, "In other words, everybody knows Syria is behind this, backed by Iran. Everyone also knows that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons, and has spent 20 years relentlessly lying about its nuclear program, yet no action is being taken against Iran." there is no chance that Bush can convince the public of that since the shibboleth that identifies the left (bush lied) has been entrenched by the MSM.

Blogs are caning the MSM in just about every facet of what has always been established as the role of the 4th estate - honest and impartial, substantiated reporting.

You're part of the revolution Armaniac.

Daniel said...

Unfortunately the moderates in Israel are being brushed aside by a cabal of religious fanatics, nationalistic extremists and the militarists.

I watch the slaughter and destruction in both Lebanon and Gaza with horror. Israel will inherit a hundred years of pain and death for this one-sided killing spree. They never learn!kd

Armagnac Esq. said...

I agree... on the other hand I give them credit that Israel spawns far more moderate voices than most of its neighbours.

Pat said...

A moral dilemna for you Armaniac: given the probabilities of an escalation in the conflict dragging in Syria and Iran a shrewd investor might consider investing in oil.

However, investing on the rational expectation that such an escalation will increase the price of oil also would mean that one would be (once committed) hoping for an escalation.

What to do?

Daniel said...

PAT, I've rarely seen such a cynical, inhumane question. Take a bow!

Pat said...

Really?

I meant it quite genuinely. From my perspective if Iran were to get involved oil prices would rocket. My involvement in the outcome is nil - it is an observation. The thing is, given that I should act upon my rational conclusions and invest, once I have then naturally I would be dissapointed if my rational expectations weren't met. Thus what I perceive to be a dilemna.

I think it is worth considering why it is a dilemna if at all.

leftvegdrunk said...

The Head Heeb's blog is excellent. Ta for the link.