Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dlishsguy
as for hezbollah...how do we 'kick' a force that was set up by due to the 1982 israeli occupation? every shiite muslim in south lebanon..or lebanon for that fact would consider him or herself hezbollah because most would agree with their main ideals of the party.
|
And therein lies one of the west's major problems with the middle east. Considering the main ideals of Hezbollah consist of eradicating Israel, they (and their supporters) are going to be diametrically opposed to the west. In addition, support of Hezbollah includes support of their methods, which consist of some fairly hideous tactics, such as continuous artillery (in the form of rockets) assaults on civilians DIRECTLY, and the use of unarmed non-combatants (such as women and children) as shields. If the people of the middle east endorse these things, then there is very little room for negotiation or bridge building.
While you may cite civilian casualties at the feet of Israel, I suggest that those are the responsibility of Hezbollah, due to its choice of tactics, and its supporters, for providing the means to execute those tactics.
Even limiting the scope of the conversation to the recent issues in Lebanon, many of the sources of the current conflicts are the responsibility of those that use terrorist tactics. Without a change in the approach from organizations like Hezbollah, negotiation and peace are improbable at best.
Veritas et Lux!
Jimmy The Hutt