Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bingo
One one side you have a democracy protecting it's own self interests and national security. I think as I've said, they've taken it too far, but that doens't change the fact that everyone country within 1000 miles wants them dead, pushed into the sea or disemboweled.
That's what I can't get my head around on this topic. Nobody wants civilians killed but how can anyone take the Hezzbollah or Palestinian side when they use suicide bombers and spout complete ethnic hatred towards the other side.
He points hard to Oil, but doesn't hit the even bigger issues in the region ... religion and intolerance.
And yes I think his anti-US stance clouds the issues for him big time.
Just my opinion.
|
Well he's quite clearly anti-US foreign policy. However he does credit the US with many things, he's not strictly anti-US.
The issue with history is that history has caused the present. There are feelings of resentment, hatred, etc because of what's gone on in the past. So we can't ignore that and it's role. People will not be appeased unless you look at the past and see how certain people have been wronged and how they think they must be avenged. You can't examine a bitter conflict that has been going on and off for decades by just looking at it in the context of the past few years, that does a disservice to all the wrongs that have been committed over the past few decades.
As for Oil vs religion I think he's bang on there. I think the religion angle is overplayed. Muslims, jews, christians live together in peace in various places in the world. And let's be careful not to paint every Muslim with the same brush. There are extremist Muslim's just like there are extremist Christians. Not every follower of Islam believes that the Jews and/or Christians must be wiped from the map, that is quite clear. So then the question becomes what has happened to increase the # of extremist Muslims? And here once again we hit history and Israel and the US's actions over the past 5 decades. Had the US not set up or supported some brutal regimes in certain parts of the middle east, religious fundamentalism would likely have gone down. Instead some of the things they've done have fueled the fire. Same goes for Israel, they are guilty of fomenting hatred towards them by their actions towards the Palestinians among others. Nobody in that region is unaware of how Israel has bulldozed villages in their attempts to "settle" the territories they conquered earlier.
Do I think many side with Hizbollah? I don't think many do. What I think you see going on with this board and other places where the debate is going on is that people are questioning the bias in the reporting (pro-Isreal) and the bias in the moral judgement (Israel is in the right, Arabs in the wrong.) Do I think the Hizbollah response is the right one? No. But at the same time I see that they have little recourse if they want to do something about it. They don't have the most powerful country in the world on their side and they aren't content to let Israel do as it pleases in the region.
Why does Israel get to protect it's interests and security by force while Hizbollah cannot do the same for Lebanon? Why is one side condemned for civilian casualties while the other is not? There's quite obviously a double standard.
Will the # of extremists go down? I think if Arab people didn't feel threatened by Israel and the US and if education and standard of living improves then the # of extremists would most certainly go down. However that isn't particularly in the US's best interest if they want to have sympathetic regimes in the middle east whose people don't demand that their natural resources be used/sold for the people in that country