Politics, Compassion, and Justice

So true, the battle is psychologically twisted…
Psychology of the fight | Jerusalem Post:

BUT A FUNNY thing happened on the way to the newsroom. While many indeed have spoken of Israel’s use of “disproportionate force,” the expected reaction and outcry against Israel did not materialize. And the most important player in this equation, the US, far from condemning Israel, has continued to back Israel’s military goals, namely, to continue fighting until Hizbullah is significantly degraded and its standing and influence are marginalized.

Hizbullah has also miscalculated in judging the strength of that “spider’s web” Nasrallah so mockingly referred to. Far from being the weak collection of fibers the sheikh expected, it is turning out to be far stronger, surprising not only Hizbullah but many in Israel as well.

Israelis, having endured some very intense years of home front violence, seem no longer to be the same people that shook and cowed in fear at Saddam’s Scuds in 1991. Israelis appear to have been inoculated against the fear of terror, and have developed psychological antibodies to repel the emotional impact of Hizbullah’s missiles.

Hopefully, the world will learn from Israel that dealing with terror involves being able to withstand bombs and missiles, and also repelling any psychological pressure a terror group may use, including the tragically cynical exploitation of civilians.
Failing to do so may enable the good guys to win the battle, but not the war.

If when Israel punches Hizbullah, Hizbullah fell on top of Lebanon and hurt her, this would be perfect.
Rantings of a Sandmonkey » Poke:

This is brilliant:

Hezballah: poke-poke-poke

Israel: Cut it out!

Hezballah: poke-poke-poke

Israel: I’m serious, cut it out!

Hezballah: poke-poke-poke

[Israel slaps Hezballah]

Hezballah to Lebanon: Mom! He hit me!

Lebanon: Stop whining. I have other things to deal with.

Hezballah: poke-poke-poke

[Israel slaps Hezballah again]

Hezballah: You wanna piece of me? Come and get it.

America:
Stop that fighting back there! Hezballah, try to stop poking, OK?
You’re bothering your mum. And you, Israel, keep your hands to yourself.

Israel: Yes, dad.

Hezballah: poke-poke-poke

[Israel slaps Hezballah again]

Hezballah: Mom! He hit me again!

Lebanon [distracted]: mm hmm

Hezballah: poke-poke-poke

[Israel punches Hezballah in the face, drawing blood]

Hezballah, touching his nose and then staring at the blood: Oh Sh*t! What did you do that for?

hehehe

This is a pretty good explanation of how the Arab/Muslim-Israeli/Jew conflict in the Middle East isn’t comprehensible under Western terms. The Arabs aren’t fighting because they’re right, they’re not killing civilians in defense, they’re murdering to avenge the embarrassment of being defeated in 1948, 1956, 1967, 1973, 1982, and soon 2006.

Another Man’s Honor - New York Times:

When you’re confronted with an honor culture like the one in the Middle East, there are two rules to keep in mind. One is that you are not going to placate the enemy with the kind of concessions that appeal to Western diplomats. “Hezbollah is fighting for honor, to humiliate the enemy, not for any particular objective,” Bowman says. “Israel has no choice in what it’s doing. Nothing short of victory by either side will change anything.”

The other rule is that you’re not going to quickly transform an honor culture. The Iraq war was predicated on the assumption that democracy would turn Iraqis into loyal citizens with new civic virtues. But for now the old loyalties to tribes and sects still matter more than any universal concept of justice. The men would rather have honor than peace.

Daniel Gordis, excerpted below, explains how serious this war with Hezbollah and Hamas (Syria and Iran) is. Most poignantly, the areas that Israel has been attacked from have been the ones they left to Arab sovereignty. The areas attacked have been within sovereign Israel. The current Israeli government was elected on a pledge to leave much of the West Bank. It logically follows that the attacking Arabs have no desire to live peacefully side-by-side a sovereign Israel. And then, what are the non-attacking Arabs doing to promote peace? Not much is visible. He then concludes, correctly in my opinion, that the attacking Arabs want to destroy Israel as much today as they did in 1947 when the UN created the state.
Daniel Gordis - Dispatches from an Anxious State (link)

The First War, All Over Again
21 July 2006
This is a different kind of war, and an old kind of war. In the last war, when they blew up buses and restaurants and sidewalks and cafes, Israelis were enraged, apoplectic with anger. This time, it’s different. Rage has given way to sadness. Disbelief has given way to recognition. Because we’ve been here before. Because we’d once believed we wouldn’t be back here again. And because we know why this war is happening.

…And then, he turned to the camera, almost screaming, pointed to the broken building, and said, “This is our home. Mi-po ani lo zaz. From here, I am not budging. And he repeated his refrain over and over again. “This is my home. And from here, I am not budging.” Mi-po ani lo zaz.

Israelis understand what this is. This is a war over our homes. Over our homes in the north, for now, but eventually, as the rockets get better and larger, all of our homes. This is not about the territories. This is not about the “occupation.” This is not about creating a Palestinian State. This is about whether there will be a state called Israel. Sixty years after Arab nations greeted the UN resolution on November 29 1947 with a declaration of war, nothing much has changed. They attacked this time for the same reason that they did sixty years ago.

At first, it was the Egyptians, Jordanians and Syrians. We put a stop to that in 1949, 1956, 1967 and 1973.

Then it was the Palestinians, who bamboozled the world (and many of us Israelis) into believing that they just wanted a State, and that their terror was simply a way of forcing us to make one possible. We fought the terror in 1982 (Lebanon), 1987 (Intifada) and even after Camp David and Oslo, once again in 2000-2005 (the Terror War). And then, we actually tried to make the State happen. We got out of Lebanon to put an end to that conflict. And even more momentous, we got out of Gaza, hoping that they’d start to build something.

And now, it’s Hezbollah. Or more accurately, Syria. Or to be more precise, Iran. …

Six years ago we pulled out of Lebanon. Same story. In defiance of the UN’s resolution 1559, Hizbollah armed itself to the teeth, and … assuming that there was little that we could or would do, it attacked on June 12, killing eight soldiers, and stealing Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev. Not from Southern Lebanon. Not from Har Dov, a tiny hilltop that’s still contested. But from inside Israel. Inside a line that no one contests.

…
And it’s like the first war because the news is broadcasting photos of lines of Arab refugees fleeing the fighting in Beirut, heading north, or to Syria. Israeli TV is showing footage of a former city that looks much more like Dresden than Beirut. There are probably some Israelis who couldn’t care less, but the ones that I talk to, work with and share a neighborhood with, do care. They understand that we probably have no choice, for Hezbollah has decided to use Beirut as its human shield, and for years and years, Lebanon did nothing to stop them. Or even to try. And we have no choice but to survive.

… That, too, looks like that old black and white footage from the War of Independence. And as a problem for Israel, we know, Arab refugees don’t disappear. They attack, we respond, they flee. And then the problem becomes ours.

…We know why they attacked then. And we know why they’re still attacking. And we’re determined to hold on for the same reason that they’re so determined never to stop. There’s one reason, and one reason only:

The Jewish People has no where else to go.

Let me understand her “logic”. She believes the NYTimes is intentionally helping terrorists. Terrorists are bad, so helping them is bad. Therefore the NYTimes is bad for helping them. So, she impersonates a terrorist to send fake anthrax to the Times. The NYTimes helps terrorists. Therefore, terrorists must want to attack the NYTimes. No, that can’t be right. Maybe she’s just looney. Seriously Anne, commit yourself already.

This article pretty much says it all. Right Wing Bloggers are rewarded for insanity/fealty towards Bush. Thinking bloggers (mostly left wing) share ideas of how to unite as a people and make our lives better. Liberal Bloggers =Fact-based community. Rightwing Bloggers = Faith-based Community.
Daily Kos: Conservatism 2.0: Legitimized Authoritarianism

This cultist political “philosophy” is elastic. The followers subscribe to their Leader’s (Bush) authoritarianism, thus abdicating what was once considered “conservatism.” They have taken that identification and reshaped it. Therefore, “conservatism” is now “legitimized authoritarianism” and asserts its control of the GOP reinforced by the fealty of the modern-day conservative movement. Meanwhile, in Dean’s opinion, Goldwater conservatism is effectively dead.

If you have not watched that interview or listened to it, please do. Dean stated that these authoritarians and their blind followers hold a “tremendous influence on Republican politics.” This is what we are up against.

Right-Wing Bloggers as Authoritarian Cultist (Bull)Sh!t-Stirrers
Now, extrapolate the argument John Dean writes about and apply it to the right-wing’s most popular bloggers. Greenwald argues in the February 12 post:

The blind faith placed in the Federal Government, and particularly in our Commander-in-Chief, by the contemporary “conservative” is the very opposite of all that which conservatism has stood for for the last four decades. The anti-government ethos espoused by Barry Goldwater and even Ronald Reagan is wholly unrecognizable in Bush followers, who - at least thus far - have discovered no limits on the powers that ought to be vested in George Bush to enable him to do good on behalf of all of us.

And in that regard, people like Michelle Malkin, John Hinderaker, Jonah Goldberg and Hugh Hewitt are not conservatives. They are authoritarian cultists. Their allegiance is not to any principles of government but to strong authority through a single leader.

The conclusion — that they are authoritarian cultists and not conservatives — is undeniable.

Etgar Keret is one of my favorite Israeli authors. He makes the salient point that it’s easier to fight an army than a guerilla civilian suicide force. One argument that he leaves out, is that you can make peace terms with an army. You can’t make peace terms with guerillas bent on your destruction. That is just a ceasefire. Too many of Israel’s borders are ceasefire lines. Israel needs a democratic constitution to decide who gets what rights, a Jewish character for such it was created, and safe, secure borders. I want Israel to cease killing civilians, but I know that it is collateral damage made in its defense. When Israel is no longer being attacked, the rights of its residents can be peaceably, and justfully decided.
The Way We War - New York Times:

Suddenly, the first salvo of missiles returned us to that familiar feeling of a war fought against a ruthless enemy who attacks our borders, a truly vicious enemy, not one fighting for its freedom and self-determination, not the kind that makes us stammer and throws us into confusion. Once again we’re confident about the rightness of our cause and we return with lightning speed to the bosom of the patriotism we had almost abandoned. Once again, we’re a small country surrounded by enemies, fighting for our lives, not a strong, occupying country forced to fight daily against a civilian population.

So is it any wonder that we’re all secretly just a tiny bit relieved? Give us Iran, give us a pinch of Syria, give us a handful of Sheik Nasrallah and we’ll devour them whole. After all, we’re no better than anyone else at resolving moral ambiguities. But we always did know how to win a war.

From Ynet news.
(Pics from Ynet

2 million Israelis under threat… Security officials said 120 Katyusha rockets were fired at Israel on Thursday, killing two people and injuring over 100.

From Haaretz

A rocket slammed into the northern port city of Haifa on Thursday evening….

In Nahariya, rocket fire killed a woman in her home, and wounded another 29 people, including a number of children. Most of the casualties were lightly hurt; one person sustained serious wounds. The woman killed in the Nahariya attacks was identified as 40-year-old Monica Zeidman (Lehrer).

…Four rockets hit Safed again Thursday evening, killing one person and wounding 11. Three of the wounded were in serious condition including two children.

….Hezbollah has declared it has over 10,000 rockets to use against Israel.

Haifa, one of Israel’s four biggest cities has been hit by missles. Okay, let’s imagine, take your pick, Canada lobbed 120 missles into Seattle and killed two people. Or perhaps Mexico fired them into San Antonio. I have a feeling we’d be pretty pissed. I have a feeling we’d respond. I have a feeling we wouldn’t care if it was Pancho Villa or the Mexican government. We would go in there and try to destroy them. We would do everything in our power to return the two or three hostages taken, whether they were in the Reserves, on the Police Force, or just plain civilians.

The NYTimes editorial may well be correct that

But even when acting justifiably in the face of aggression, Israel best serves its long-term security interests by acting wisely and proportionately. Its guiding principle must always be to focus military actions as narrowly as possible on those individuals, organizations and governments directly complicit in the attacks, while sparing the civilian populations that surround them.

In any case, whether we agree with Israel’s response, we must understand it. This is not a cycle of violence. This is not a tit for tat. This is a sovereign nation responding to attacks on its citizens by neighbors who think of making peace in terms of destroying Israel as we know it.

Holy Crap! The the Israeli-Muslim conflict is disintegrating again! Note to Radical Muslims: Israel will do everything in its power to return its kidnapped soldiers alive. It may release political prisoners as collateral, but never any criminals with blood on their hands. Whereas Radical Muslims send their young men and women out to commit suicide murders of civilians, Israel does everything in its power to return its citizens home, whether alive or deceased.
PM Olmert calls Hezbollah border attack an ‘act of war’ - Haaretz - Israel News:

PM Olmert calls Hezbollah border attack an ‘act of war’

By Gideon Alon, Aluf Benn, Amos Harel and Yoav Stern, Haaretz Correspondents and Haaretz Service

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert on Wednesday declared that Hezbollah’s attack on the northern border earlier in the day, during which two Israel Defense Forces soldiers were kidnapped, was “an act of war.”

The two were seized as rockets were fired at northern towns, during residents took to their bomb shelters.

Olmert, who was to hold an emergency cabinet meeting later Wednesday, said the attack was not an act of terror but an attack by a sovereign state on Israel.

…MK Avshalom Vilan of the leftist Meretz party said “something disconcerting is happening at the defense establishment. Events are recurring and the Israel Defense Forces is not finding the appropriate remedies.”

The spokesman of Hamas in Lebanon, Osama Hamdan, said Hezbollah’s seizure of two soldiers in a raid Wednesday strengthens the position of the Hamas as a whole, which captured an Israel soldier on June 25.

“We have proven to this enemy (Israel) that the one option is the release of Palestinian, Lebanese and Arab captives. All captives, without exception,” Hamdan told Al-Jazeera television.

“What happened has strengthed the issue of the captives, and the enemy will submit to our choice, which is the exchange of the captives in return for the release of the soldiers,” he said.

Hamdan did not say whether Hamas had consulted with Hezbollah over Wednesday’s seizure. But he said they may be subsequent “coordination and an understanding” between the two groups, suggesting they might coordinate their demands.

Israel has carried out several prisoner swaps with Hezbollah in the past to obtain freedom for captured Israelis. In January 2004 swap, an Israeli civilian and the bodies of three IDF soldiers killed by Hezbollah were exchanged for 436 Arab prisoners and the bodies of 59 Lebanese fighters.

In 1985, three IDF soldiers captured in Lebanon in 1982 were traded for 1,150 Lebanese and Palestinian prisoners.

Take a good look at those prisoner exchange ratios. Which side do you think is more willing do what it takes to return its citizens home, even at the expense of releasing violent and dangerous prisoners back into the world.

Bush has a mental deficit if he thinks overpredicting a nonetheless massive deficit is something to celebrate.

Daily Kos: State of the Nation:

Bush wants high-fives all around for yet another massive budget deficit.

Today, the Office of Management Budget projected a $296 billion federal deficit for fiscal year 2006. Bush held a press conference arguing that this is a vindication of his economic policies.

Actually, it would be the fourth largest deficit of all time. Here’s the top five:

1. 2004 (George W. Bush) $413 billion
2. 2003 (George W. Bush) $378 billion
3. 2005 (George W. Bush) $318 billion
4. 2006 (George W. Bush) $296 billion (projected)
5. 1992 (George H. W. Bush) $290 billion

When President Bush came into office, he inherited a surplus of $284 Billion. At that time, the Bush administration predicted a $516 billion surplus for 2006.

I remember when Republicans thought deficits were bad. Now they are celebrating them.