OT: Counter-Terrorism is a Farce

[Atrocities]

You make a good point about distinction between terrorism and terror. While I do not know for certain that Israel bombed a hospital, I will speculate that if they did do so, that they did so for a reason and that for the most part the people in that hospital were given advanced notice. I do not believe that Hezbollah gave any advanced notice to any Israeli before their rockets struck.

Hezbollah uses people as human shields and they are the ones that should be blamed for the colateral damage, not Israel. Israel may have dropped the bomb, but it was Hezbollah that made it a target, and did so knowing that inocent people would die as a result. If Israel did not attack these human shielded bases of Hezbollah operations, then this tactic of using inocent people as human shields would become standard operating proceedure in Hezbollahs play book.

I would like to point out that in many instances following a terrorist attack in many countries over the years, many inocent people have died as a result of that countries efforts to end the terrorist siege. Russa, Germany, England, spain, and even France have all been forced to do things for the greater good that in the short term killed inocent people. This is most unfortunate and most regrettable and should never be taken or accepted as affordable losses. In that regard Israel did go to great lengths by dropping fliers to warn people to leave and or evacuate prior to any bombings.

As to whether or not they should have dropped those bombs I can only say that I wish that they had found other ways to achieve their objective other than destroying the homes and infastructure of inocent people being used by the terrorist group Hezbollah during their unprovoked assualt on Israel.

EDIT:
I would also like to point out that if Hezbollah is saying that Israel bombed a hospitol full of injured people that it could be a set up. Hell for all we know, and according to at least one news organization and blogger, Hezbollah has doctored up photo's, used many people several times, a women crying infront of a bombed out building, and then the same women as a victim of a bombing. A man as a rescue worker then was shown as a dead victim following a bombing, then seen again as a supporter of Hezbollah. I choose not to believe anything that comes from Hezbollah and question any news report that indicates that Israel intentionally bombed a hospital full of injuried people. Chance are that the source for that news came directly from Hezbollah and therefore is questionable even if reported by a lagitimate news organization. Look at all the things they have gotten wrong in recent days to know that even the best news organizations can be dupped. All I am saying is keep an open mind and take nothing on face value. There is more to be gained by propoganda than by truth. And truth is often harder to come by in the face of a well organized campaign of propoganda. In war the truth is often the first casualty.

Israel had nothing to gain by alledgely bombing a hospitol full of injured people so I don't buy that they did so. If they did bomb it, I do not believe that it was a benevolant act.

[Will]

I thought I would walk into a hornets nest when I read the title, and I was right... A few comments:

1) It is entirely misleading to say "Hezbollah started it!" or "Israel started it!". If you say the first, try standing in the shoes of the Hezbollah fighters, think what they were thinking; why did they kidnap Israeli soldiers? To think that it is only because all Arabs (or even these particular Arabs) are racist pricks that hate Jews and Israel is both naïve and racist. Far more likely is anger at Lebannese prisoners still being held in Israel from the occupation of Lebannon circa 1982 during the Israeli invasion of southern Lebannon, up to the withdrawl in 2000. In fact, that's the reason that Hezbollah stated was the reason for kidnapping what they considered to be enemy combatants. You can follow such tit-for-tat events all the way back to the end of the first World War, when the West cut up the Middle East after the fall of the Ottoman Empire, and began meddling in politics in the region ever since. There really isn't anything resembing a Western democracy in the Middle East precisely because we never let it happen. It is much easier to get what you want out of a dictator than a slow deliberation in a Parliment or Congress.

2) Yes, the "War on Terror" is a farce. It's the only reason Bush Jr. got re-elected in 2004, and it creates lots of cushy jobs for people throughout the defense sector. I worked for a defense company this summer in fact, and I can tell you it is a cabal. Once you're "in", you will always be in. If there isn't enough jobs to go around, the higher up leadership will take every opportunity they can to create more. After the Cold War ended, there was pressure to cut down on massive military spending, since we didn't have the big boogeyman of Communist Russia to fear anymore. Terrorism was the perfect replacement, since there isn't really any chance that it can be erradicated. So, it keeps the leadership of the country in power because all you need to do is cause people to fear becoming overrun by terrorists if the way things are done changes to what The Other Guy wants. And it keeps the money coming into the military-industrial complex. Ike must be rolling in his grave right now, because it seems no one listened to his warnings.

3) How to really stop terrorism: another Marshall Plan, this time for Africa and the Middle East. Instead of destroying infrastructure, rebuild it. Get reliable transportation, power, and communication to the urban centers, and then expand it out into the rural areas. Fund education in the urban centers, for both boys and girls; there it will be more likely to be accepted. Elsewhere, education will be opposed by extremists, and will be impossible to undertake. Curriculum should consist of basic knowledge of science and mathematics in the Western tradition, as well as local art and literature, regional and world history, and the culture's religious texts (will be helpful to start out with a peaceful religious message, to make it harder for a violent message to take over religious discourse). Young children will be taught in the local language, and as they progress, the "language of business" (i.e. English) and other languages will be taught. Make it known in the countryside that there is education for all available, and set up temporary shelters for the people that will migrate toward the urban centers, until they can settle somewhere around the cities. Allow the population to arm themselves, and train locals to handle their own security. After about five years of relying on Western support for security logistics, there should be enough experience for locals to handle logistical security ops. As the cities are being rebuilt, leave the countryside to the warlords and extremists, it is too difficult do defend such a dispersed area, and as the cities are built up, all those that migrated to the urban areas for a chance at a better life will begin moving outward to reclaim their countries.

If these things are done with full faith, I see no reason why we cannot have peaceful thriving societies in the Middle East within a decade of the program's start. As the cities thrive, I see no reason why there cannot be peace in the Middle East within 30 years. And if there is a flaw in my thinking, please point it out to me, so I can fix it before I take over the world

[Atrocities]

I do believe that our special forces knows right where Bin Laden is, but are prohibitted from going in and getting him because to do so would effectively casterate the "war on terror."

[StarShadow]

Well said, Will.

Hate does not exist in a vacuum, and hate doesn't just spring out of nothing. Hate has to have a cause. I think that maybe people should start looking for that cause for themselves, rather than relying on the soundbites that pass as news these days. I reccomend watching Peace, Propoganda and the Promised Land, as a start.