Four in ten Lebanese citizens are Christians. Might we hope that their neighbor's aerial bombardment misses them and strikes those Shiite Muslims involved in the Hezbollah terrorist organization? Murderers and kidnappers, and not the Lebanese population so long victimized by such barbarism, deserve to feel these military strikes. Killing these brigands will probably do Lebanon more good than Israel. Not killing them and instead killing innocents will probably do Israel more harm than Lebanon. Caught in the crossfire, many in Lebanon find themselves between a rock and a hard place.

Just as a quick refresher, what do you feel would be the appropriate response if, over the last year, Canada had fired over 1,000 rockets into the United States, adn then had crossed our border, killed four of our soldiers, kidnapped two more, and demanded we engage in prisoner exchange with them?

Because I'm pretty sure we'd be bombing Ottowa long before Israel bombed Beirut.

In fairness, Hezbollah is not the Lebanese government, so my example is not entirely accurate.And obviously I don't want to see my fellow Christians-or any innocents, get caught in the crossfire.

Regardless, there is only so much abuse a country can take before striking back. I won't condemn a sovereign state for defending its borders.

It should be noted that 100 Lebanese civilians have been killed. This is the IDF, among the most poweful military organizations on Earth. In order to keep the body count that low, they have to have exercised large restraint.

Ultimately the only way Hezbollah is going to be permantly driven from Lebanon is if the Lebanese civilians do it.
Isreal is going to do their best to drive them out,then they'll pull back, at which point Hezbollah or some other like group will just return. Starting the whole cycle over yet again.

"In fairness, Hezbollah is not the Lebanese government..."

Actually, Hezbollah occupies 12 out of the 128 seats in the National Assembly (note that by law Shi'a Muslims can occupy only 27 seats in the Assembly). Two of the cabinet ministers are also members of Hezbollah. And the government supports Hezbollah's activities.

Primitive animals. Let Israel bomb them into oblivion especially for targeting civilians.

Not saying Christians good, Muslims bad but it's pretty clear that everytime the "religion of peace" is involved, there will be bloody violence. At least Christianity tries to teach the difference between right and wrong. Muslims don't seem to be able to make that distinction.

According to Ralph, less than half the Shiites suppoerted Hezbollah in a country where less than half is Shiite. According to Ben T, Hezbollah is not the governtment of Lebanon, but we are suppoesed to view their attacks on Israel as we would a Canadian attack on the US. According to asdf, the inhabitant of an old, civilized, religiously mixed country are primitive beasts who deserve death.

Perspective anyone?
Law of Nations anyone?
Christianity anyone?

BS,

Will you accept the distinction between elected and supported? Surely you don't deny that Hezbollah is supported by the Lebanese government as well as the vast majority of Lebanon's Muslims.

How about this for perspective BS - The Lebanese sanctioned Hezbollah targets innocent civilians, Israel retaliates and targets airports and militarily strategic installations.

Makes me laugh how people in this country make judgments about how Israel is handling this when we have the luxury of wringing our hands and the freedom of having a concerned opinion from afar. That's the difference between a country that has the lions at the gate and one that has the luxury of natural barriers and distance.

asdf: sanctioned? The fact that it is a party with some representation within their system doesn't mean that whatever they do can be blamed on the country.

Funny. I thought you people wanted democracy over there, but now you say that the country should be attacked merely for not making a particular part illegal.

Ralph: Your "supported" seems very vague. In what specific ways does the Lebanese government support the terrorist activities of Hezbollah? Wouldn't it make more sense to target Iran for support of Hezbollah that Lebanon for putting up with them. Regarding being supported by the "vast majority" of Lebanese Muslims-- I've seen no evidence of that. In fact, you 12/128 number indicates otherwise. Very mixed country, and you keep painting a picture of monolithic support for a government sponsered Hezbollah.

BS,

Hezbollah has free reign to control and fortify the southern third of Lebanon. A condition (Taif Agreement) of Israel's withdrawal from Lebanon was the control of the border by the Lebanese army. The army has conceded control to Hezbollah. Lebanon justified its failure to control the border, a violation of the Taif Agreement, by characterizing Hezbollah as a legitimate national resistance force. In addition, Hezbollah has been allowed to amass over a thousand rockets.

Apparently, my numbers on Hezbollah's representation in the National Assembly were dated. This is from Wikipedia: "In 1992, [Hezbollah] participated in Lebanese elections for the first time, winning 12 out of 128 seats in parliament. It won 10 seats in 1996, and 8 in 2000. In the general election of 2005, it won 23 seats nationwide, and an Amal-Hezbollah alliance won all 23 seats in Southern Lebanon." The last sentence is confusing, but another source indicates that Hezbollah won 10 seats in the Mount Lebanon and Bekaa Valley regions, and all of the additional 23 seats in Southern Lebanon. So Hezbollah occupies 33 of the 128 seats (26%).

http://www.ipu.org/parline-e/reports/2179_E.htm

BS, if you're talking about majority rule in their allegedly democratic system, then how did this happen in the first place and how does it continue? Pluueese.

Dear ASDF: the meaning of your post is not clear. Pluueese try to write with meaning and not just with words. Not all of us have been inducted in the herd by which the justice of all Israeli military and police actions is obvious.

Ralph: This is a bid issue, and not a clear one. What does it mean that Lebanon has "allowed" Hezbollah to do something? Does controlling a small percentage of the parliament mean that a group's activities are now all state activities? Does starting a fight mean that the people retaliating have no limitations on what they are morally allowed to do, not only to those who picked the fight, but also to those who live around and perhaps put up with those who did? What does starting the fight mean, given the history of the conflicts here, and the origin of Hezbollah as a response to Israeli occupation of Southern Lebanon, in the first place? And what about the normal Lebanese people who seem to have little choice to live decently just to make peace with their crazy neighbors and put up with political and religious difference (isn't this what Israel wants the Muslims to do for them? Why should we punish the Christian Lebanese for doing it for Hezbollah?)?

Oh, you're right. Forget the hard questions of responsibility and proportionality and just conduct of war. Let's just bomb the animals, and if their neighbors die or have their houses and cities destroyed in the process, well, that'll teach them to be neighbors with animals.

BS
When the animals you go after hide amidst civilians you have a choice. Do nothing and allow yourself to continue being attacked,or go after the animals anyway, making the decision that protecting your own ass is more important. Precisely targeting the animals as best you can.
If you think thats horrific then you must also condem most of the bombing done by the allies during WW2.

If the Lebanese civilians took care of the problem themselves this wouldn't be happening.
I'm curious what magic weapon or military strategy should be used to kill your enemy when they purposely hide among civilians? How would you go about killing the animals without harming the civilians?

From the best I can tell, the Lebanese have not made enough of an effort to go after the terrorists that are in their midst. Now Israel must do it. It is amatter of their national survival.

BS,

Here are my answers to your "hard" questions:

"What does it mean that Lebanon has 'allowed' Hezbollah to do something?"

The Lebanese government, in violation of its agreement with Israel, has not sent the army to occupy and control its Southern border. The reason Israel wants the Lebanese army on the border is to prevent Hezbollah from attacking Israel. These terms were explicitly negotiated in the Taif Agreement. Lebanon, however, has refused to honor the Agreement, and consequently, has left Hezbollah in control of the border. In addition, Hezbollah has openly amassed thousands of rockets capable of striking Israel. Finally, a nation is responsible for military actions conducted within its own borders.

"Does controlling a small percentage of the parliament mean that a group's activities are now all state activities?"

I wouldn't call 26% a small percentage, but I accept that Hezbollah's actions are not necessarily state activities, i.e., the Lebanese government did not order these attacks. Nonetheless, the Lebanese government has failed to control its own territory, its border with Israel in particular. They have explicitly allowed Hezbollah to do so, stating that Hezbollah is a legitimate resistance force. That amounts to a state sanction of Hezbollah's activities.

"Does starting a fight mean that the people retaliating have no limitations on what they are morally allowed to do, not only to those who picked the fight, but also to those who live around and perhaps put up with those who did?"

Of course there are limitations. For example, the Israelis ought not carpet-bomb Beirut, or use nuclear weapons against Lebanese cities, or send Lebanese men, women and children to gas chambers. These are extremes, and the limit is somewhere between these and what Israel is currently doing. Where to draw the line is an open question, but I do not believe that Israel is close to crossing it.

"What does starting the fight mean, given the history of the conflicts here, and the origin of Hezbollah as a response to Israeli occupation of Southern Lebanon, in the first place?"

I have yet to see a single commentator argue that Hezbollah's abduction of the Israeli soldiers was provoked.

"And what about the normal Lebanese people who seem to have little choice to live decently just to make peace with their crazy neighbors and put up with political and religious difference?"

The normal Lebanese people elected a majority goverment that is obligated to control its own territory. A force of 20,000 well-trained and well-armed Hezbollah soldiers in possession of thousands of rockets capable of striking Israel cannot be tolerated on the grounds of "political and religious differences." Hezbollah can be as different as it wants, so long as they don't attack Israel.