The countries that the Lebanese most trust for peacekeeping in Southern Lebanon are Canada, Brazil and Japan.
No matter how this crisis ends, there will be without doubt some kind of peacekeeping force that will assist the Lebanese army in the south of Lebanon. Here are my ten cents on why they should be Canadian, Brazilian and Japanese.
We won’t trust the neighboring countries to send their soldiers because they might never leave. This discounts Syria and Jordan. Turkey brings ugly colonial memories, so they are out too (sorry, I know you want the job, but we’re not comfortable with it). The Arab countries and Iran are too involved and partial. Sub-Saharan Africans won’t scare anybody (with my deepest respect to Ghanaian peacekeepers in the UNIFIL).
The force should have unanimous support from the Lebanese people; this immediately discounts Israel, the US and the UK. France is admired by some Lebanese (The Maronites and the Sunnis), but to others (like President Emile Lahhoud and the Shiaas) it represents a colonial past and is an unwelcome influence. Spain and Italy are too Catholic, Germany still needs time before it could send soldiers abroad, the Scandinavians and the Swiss are too pacifist, Eastern Europe is too pro-American.
The Russians are too eager to spite the Americans and the Chinese are too willing to bargain for oil. Besides, both are too heavy-handed. Pakistan is too Muslim and India is too anti-Muslim. Australia is too pro-American and New Zealand is too far. Argentina has a history with Hezbollah and Venezuela is too anti-American. Mexico, Paraguay, Uruguay, Bolivia and Chile are too poor.
Which brings us to the most trusted, most independent countries in Lebanese eyes: Brazil, Canada and Japan.
Aside from the Soccer fans who raised Brazilian flags all over the country during the world-cup, Brazil has the right mixture of independence, thirld-worldism and clout. It also helps that Brazil has more Lebanese descendents than Lebanon itself.
Canada is the most respected and neutral country in Lebanese eyes. I remember once going to the south, in a Hezbollah controlled area. There was a hotel that wanted to portray an international image; so it raised the Canadian flag next to the Iranian, Saudi and Syrian flags. Canada has been very sympathetic to Lebanese Immigrants and Canadian Universities are having special measures to help Lebanese students follow their studies there. There are no Lebanese who consider Canadians their enemies.
Japan is associated here with nothing but hi-tech, robots and gizmos. A peacekeeping force will definitely need assistance with their computers and laser-guided missiles. The sushi (which we’re beginning to terribly miss here) will be a plus.
| Print: 
The beirut spring is a blog that is interested in Lebanese society and its politics. It started in February 2005 after the assassination of Prime Minister Rafik Hariri
August 3rd, 2006 at 6:26 am
Mustapha!
I’m sure that Israel will not object Canada, Brasil and Japan. However, I believe there will be another europien country, maybe German.
But let’s not be naive!!!
No international force is going to disarm Hizbullah. Israel must combine victory on the battlefield with diplomatic creativity.
More than 20 years ago there was another, similar, attempt. An international force, consisting of 1,800 US Marines, 1,500 French foreign legionnaires and 1,400 Italian soldiers came to Lebanon to help stabilize the country’s leadership.
Hizbullah decided their presence stood in opposition to Iranian and Lebanese interests, and a suicide bomber drove an explosive-laden truck into the forces’ barracks, killing 241 Marines and 58 French soldiers.
It didn’t take long for the presidents of France and the United States to pull out of Lebanon: Overall, the Americans lost 265 soldiers and 159 casualties, France lost 89 men and 110 wounded, and Italy lost one soldier.
Israel and Lebanon were left alone to face Hizbullah, Iran’s Revolutionary Guards and the Syrian army in Lebanon.
I don’t have to tell you how this story ened……
There is no chance an international force will be deployed in Lebanon with any enforcement power.
August 3rd, 2006 at 6:36 am
Good morning all,
Who are we lebanese trying to kid. Do we really believe the Islamo-fascism and Hezbollah will respect a peacekeeping force. All my fellow Lebanese who are backing Hezbollah, i ask, once they open fire and go balls out on the peacekeeping troops, will you still be licking nasrallah’s behind? I understand the need to be unified, but putting a halo on nasrallah head is insanely absurd.
August 3rd, 2006 at 6:55 am
Anonymous said…
Hizbullah decided their presence stood in opposition to Iranian and ***Lebanese interests ****, and a suicide bomber drove an explosive-laden truck into the forces’ barracks, killing 241 Marines and 58 French soldiers. ”
So Hezbollah was for Lebanon’s interest, not bad, they should be for interest of Lebanon. Or was that a slip of the Tongue on your part ? Since immediately you write the following:
” Israel and Lebanon were left alone to face Hizbullah, Iran’s Revolutionary Guards and the Syrian army in Lebanon. ”
So let me get this straight , now Israel that had invaded Lebanon , cluster Bombed Beirut and killed 18.000 innocent Lebanese civilians all of a sudden is on the same side with Lebanese against the big bad Hizbollah that wanted to kick the invaders ass out of Lebanon back to their promised land ?!!
August 3rd, 2006 at 7:02 am
Hi,
I’m not from Leban - I’m from Poland. However, I’m not sure if I understand correctly. For us - Canada is a country, which is very connected to US (in fact they’re neighbours). That’s why I’m not sure if it’s good idea.
Also please tell me one thing. You mentioned also Japan. However, Japaneese soldiers were/are also positioned in Iraq right now - and I remember that there were some cases when Japaneese reporters were captured.
That’s why I don’t think if nationality have so much important. Well I agree that US or Israeli troops won’t do anything good - but from the other hand, rest of countries you’ve mentioned should be ok.
August 3rd, 2006 at 7:56 am
Wait, wait, I don’t get it. “Germany still needs time before it could send soldiers abroad” but for JAPAN it is OK?
Maybe my history book is different.
August 3rd, 2006 at 8:29 am
MOJGAN!
Do you have reading comprehension problem?
If you think “Hezbollah was for Lebanon’s interest”. Do not agree to an international force and let
Hezbollah keep the “peace”.
Just bare in mind that Israel will fight it till the end. unlike past encounters with Hezbollah, this time there is a sweeping support all around the globe to exterminate Hezbollah.
Hezbollah turned to be a global threatening, up to a point that even most Arab nations would like to see it get off stage.
August 3rd, 2006 at 9:25 am
Replying to Krzysztof who said that “I’m not from Leban - I’m from Poland. […] For us - Canada is a country, which is very connected to US (in fact they’re neighbours). That’s why I’m not sure if it’s good idea.”
By your logic then, Poland is very connected with both Russia and Germany, just because you are neighbours? I’m sure you would disagree with this statement.
I am Canadian. Without trying to be defensive: Yes, Canada and the US are geographical neighbours, but it would be naïve and simplistic to say that this means Canada is too ‘connected’ to the US to be considered a neutral party in the Mid-East. I agree that the Canadian and US governments generally have very similar views about just about everything and usually support each other. However, when it comes to Mid-East politics, the actions of the two governments are VERY different. And as pointed out by Mustapha, the Lebanese people know this.
You don’t see Canada actively supporting and supplying the Israeli armed forces, and even continuing to ship munitions to them during this ongoing crisis. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/5218036.stm) You also don’t see Canada blocking dozens of UN Security Council resolutions against Israel. (http://www.krysstal.com/democracy_whyusa03.html)
Incidentally, Poland contributed 2000 troops to the current Iraq war, whereas Canada did not and was in fact openly against the US-led invasion to begin with. So one could argue that, when it comes to Mid-East foreign policy, Poland is more connected to the US than Canada is.
August 3rd, 2006 at 9:28 am
Well Germany and Japan - they both sent their soldiers abroad already. Germany to Afghanistan and Japan to Iraq - so this has already been done.
August 3rd, 2006 at 10:04 am
Hi Mustapha,
I disagree with you on Japan and Italy. Japan for their history in Iraq, as pointed out previously. Italy had a good peace keeping record in Lebanon when they were part of the Multi-National Force in 82-83. They maintained neutrality throughout the crisis at the time and they played a humanitarian role in their area of operation which included Dahie, Burj Barajne and all the other Shii sections of Beirut. For that, they were spared the fate of their American and French partners in the force who took sides in the war at the time. However, Italy might be remembered for their role in Iraq, but again they had an excellent history with the Shias of Lebanon. Robert Fisk of The Independent wrote an article about that last week. You can check out the archives for more analysis on the issue from the Lebanon veteran Fisk.
August 3rd, 2006 at 10:50 am
it’s more important who israelis will accept, don’t you think? they are the ones with biggest guns.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:12 am
Seriously, what do you know about Scandinavians? No we do not wage wars, but we happen to have spme of the most disciplined, civilized and professional armed forces in the world. British, Canadian and American forces have often been found guilty of abusing civilians, rape, assault, et c or unable to handle situations professionally. Sweden and Norway have an extremely good reputation, especially when it comes to multi-national missions and peacekeeping assignments because we’re relatively neutral, trustworthy and have a long tradition. So please, spare me your views until you know what you’re talking about.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:17 am
sushi, football and canada all sound great but wouldn’t it be much more simple to let the lebanese army take over the south?
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:09 pm
Today!
In a speech during an emergency meeting of Muslim leaders in Malaysia, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said: the solution to the Middle East crisis is to destroy Israel.
Considering the tight relationships between HA and Iran (HA, infact,is financed, trained and controled by Iran).
1. What should Israel do facing this threat?
How should Israel deal with Iran’s proxy (HA)?
2. Can a cease-fire be implemented when one side declares: “Although the main solution is for the elimination of the Zionist regime, at this stage an immediate ceasefire must be implemented,”. As Ahmadinejad said?
3. in the light of thise statement, can a cease-fire last long?
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:55 pm
I don’t think Lebanon will have the luxury of picking and choosing. The UN is under-funded and the burden of cost is going to end up on whatever nation(s) send troops. Lebanon has a track record of killing peacekeepers. Extremists might use Syria as a staging area for attacks. The list of reasons to avoid Lebanon is very large and the list of reasons to help is very small.
On another page it was suggested that Lebanese should organize a massive march for peace. That would help more than you could imagine. It would add another reason to help. As it stands, you’ll hear a lot of talk and empty promises but get very few volunteers.
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:55 pm
It is interesting that you mention Canada. While I am flattered that you find Canada trustworthy you should note that we have officially labeled Hizb’Allah a terrorist organization - we consider them essentially equivalent to the Taliban, which we are currently battling in Afghanistan. The only contact we would have with Hizb’Allah would be in battle.
So if the mandate of the international force were to help the Lebanese Army defeat and disarm Hizb’Allah everywhere in Lebanon I suppose it’s possible Canada would provide some assistance. But we have no interest in providing human shields for Hizb’Allah - which is what UNIFIL effectively is.
But I would say the chances are pretty slim. Our forces are stretched pretty thin taking on the Taliban at the moment - I don’t think we’re interested in another engagement like that just now.
Best wishes from Canada.
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:02 pm
mojgan,
why don’t you just tell us what you think is fair?
let us assume that the west can control Israel if the arabs can control the extremists.
In your opinion, which nations should get which lands?
How should permanent peace be maintained?
How should violators be punished?
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:21 pm
I think many Lebanese like to exaggerate the number of people in Brasil of Lebanese origin. Brasil is a melting pot. You do see Lebanese or Arabic restaurants even in the smallest towns but the owners of the Arabic fast food chain “Habib’s” are not even Lebanese.
I agree that Brasil would make a good peacekeeping candidate. The chain jewellery store “H.Stern” is Jewish, and people of Jewish origin like to keep their original names like “Zylberstaijn” which might have been changed to “Silverstone” or plain “Silver” if they lived in the U.S. They can get away with it in Brasil.
Canada - I am not sure. The government there has not condemned Israeli war crimes. Turkey, agreed, unsuitable, a former imperial power with its own record of atrocities against the Lebanese. Japan, maybe. You left out Russia, which, because of the large number of oligarchs of Jewish origin, is much less pro-Arab than in Soviet times, so Israel and the U.S. should not object (even though neo-cons have been agitating in support of Islamists in the Chechen reballion, aiming to break up the Russian Federation). You could have added Greece.
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:43 pm
I do not know whether the Farms are part of Lebanon or Syria. But it does not really matter because on thing is certain - they are not part of Israel.
Before July 12 Israel was an occupying power in two or three countries. At this time it is the occupying power in three. Israel has been illegally annexing territory from these occupied countries. Israel desires the legitimacy that a peace keeping force in southern Lebanon would give these annexations.
I do not think that there are any countries that would be willing to provide a peace keeping force in Lebanon before Israel withdraws behind the 1967 line. Otherwise any such peace keeping force risks being seen as an Israeli proxy.
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:20 pm
harry, so you want a pro arab peace keeping force now? right it is going to happen.
i actually don’t think there will not be ANY difference what nationality will be there. nor i think lebanon will have a choice. what if brazilians say “screw this s…t, i’m not going to lebanon to die!” ?
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:51 pm
wild rice,
one step at a time. First, you must be more granular. You treat Lebanon, Syria, and palestine as if they were a single nation. Peace will never happen in such a framework unless the three governments are willing to merge into a single entity. Barring that, each of the four groups will play the others while trying to gain an advantage. It is a fornmula for never ending conflict.
Where should the border between Israel and Lebanon be?
If Syria wishes to wage war against Israel due to an Israeli/Syrian border conflict should Lebanon be involved?
How should permanent peace be maintained at the Israeli/Lebanon border?
How should violators be punished?
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:24 pm
“Mexico, Paraguay, Uruguay, Bolivia and Chile are too poor.”
Your statement that Mexico is too poor in comparison is not accurate. Mexico’s economy (USD$714B) is almost identical to Brazil (USD$731B). http://www.econstats.com/weo/index_glweo.htm
Mexico is a neutral country that has many Lebanese descendants and other social, cultural, and economic ties to Lebanon. Please embrace your friends in this great time of need.
People in Mexico, United States, and Canada care deeply about the Lebanese and Israeli people and all others affected by this terrible tragedy. To discriminate between the Lebanese or Israeli people is unnecessary, we are all humans that care about each other and we must resolve issues as humans (regardless of religion or race) in a civilized manner and not as irrational animals.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:10 pm
There is no way that Israel is going to withdraw behind all of the pre-1967 borders. In the mind of the Israelis, they have tried the land-for-peace deal and they have gained…suicide bombings, katyusha rockets and Hamas in power. They may give up Shebaa Farms, but you can forget the Golan or any other land being returned.
As far as a peace-enforcing group (let’s be honest, there will be no peace to keep) it does not matter who the Lebanese want. Israel will not return south of the Blue Line unless there is a force in place that can deter and prevent any further rocket attacks by Hezbollah against them. For Hezbollah to say that they will not agree to a cease-fire while any Israeli soldier is even on one meter of Lebanese territory only exacerbates the empasse.
In light of the Israeli bombing of civilians many Lebanese have voiced their support for Israel. What many Lebanese will come to realize when the bombing and shelling stops is that Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah led them down this road to destruction and ruin.
March 14, 2005 was one of the most amazing sights that I have ever witnessed. Hundreds of thousands, my own estimation is over 1 million, Lebanese gathered in Martyr’s Square to call for Syria to leave, the government to resign, and for the truth of the Hariri assasination to come out. The momentum of this grass-roots tsunami soon dissapated amid the wrangling and deal-making that goes along with Lebanese elections. Even before this current crisis, the government of Lebanon was as fractured and as divided along sectarian lines as it had ever been.
My point is this: if following the March 14 rally the politicians had listened to the will of the people, “hurriye, siyadeh wa isti’lal” (freedom, sovereignty and independence) rather than focusing on the power grab of a post-Syrian Lebanon, things would be very different. Would Hezbollah be completely disarmed? Maybe not, but their political clout would have been severely diminished and they would at least have to engage in dialouge rather thumbing their collective noses at the people of Lebanon.
Make no mistake, Hezbollah cares NOTHING about the people of Lebanon as a whole. It cares about its constituency, the Shi’a of Lebanon (mostly in the south) and its benefactors, Syria and Iran. Other than that it is entirely about self-preservation and the consolidation of political clout. They have it now and it will have to be pried from their cold dead fingers. The people of Lebanon had better pray that the day comes sooner rather than later.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:13 pm
wild rice,
I do not know whether the Farms are part of Lebanon or Syria. But it does not really matter because on thing is certain - they are not part of Israel
Yeah, it makes a BIG difference. Syria doesn’t need Hezbollah to fight over its territory. It can negotiate peace with Israel on its own. Israel occupied the territory after Syria (along with Jordan and Egypt) attacked it. Based on that, it isn’t clear that the land doesn’t belong rightfully to Israel.
Hezbollah has (ostensibly) no dog in the fight if Shebba Farms belongs to Syria. The suddenly decided the SF belonged to Lebanon after Israel pulled out of the country, so they could have a reason to keep up their terrorist activities in Lebanon. Which is why so many Israelis doubt that giving up any amount of land will pacify their neighboring Arabs.
August 3rd, 2006 at 5:02 pm
To Claude, and any one who believes Canada is a good idea… Where have you been hiding for the past, hmmm, I don’t know, 8 months? Our PM dearest, Mr. Harper, is nothing but Bush’s puppet!!Let me think, what did he say when the Canadian UN soldier was killed? It might as well have been “s**t happens”, for I’m sure that’s how it sounded to the soldier’s mother! Canada, with the leadership of GW Bush… oops, I mean Harper, will soon no longer be viewed as a peacekeeping county… if it hasn’t already
August 3rd, 2006 at 5:29 pm
To Mustapha
I can understand why these countries. However what do you think on the some of the voices heard throughout the UN (Israel ahs also thought about it) that a Muslim country dhould also participate in the multi-national force? Do you think it’s wise? And if so, what candidates would you have in mind?
August 3rd, 2006 at 6:05 pm
michael,
i beg to differ regarding the blue line. Israel is playing the “all we want is peacekeepers” card as a delaying tactic. They know full well that no country is going to accept the burden. When Israel thinks that hezzbollah has been sufficiently gutted then they will withdraw - with or without a peace plan for Lebanon. The success of the cedar revolution put another card into play and that is the hand Israel has pursued since the first day. Nay, scratch that. I would say that Israel had these plans months ago and were just waiting for the chance. Their gambit is based on four cards. First, that hezzbollah is the only group in Lebanon who would attack israel without government approval. Second, that hezzbollah’s only real source of power is their weapons. Third, the majority of Lebanese would do something if not for the fear of civil war.
If you accept these three assumptions then all of Israel’s choices of action and inaction are consistent with the pursuit of a stable northern border. I accept these three assumptions along with the fourth assumption (Israel wants a stable northern border). As such, I beg to differ regarding the blue line. I think that Israel will withdraw because it is in her best interests to do so. It’s just a matter of “how will they know when?”
August 3rd, 2006 at 6:07 pm
ooops, sorry michael. I misread your comment and responded to something you never said. I apologize.
August 3rd, 2006 at 7:09 pm
Anonymous said :
“In a speech during an emergency meeting of Muslim leaders in Malaysia, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said: the solution to the Middle East crisis is to destroy Israel.”
I see you have downloaded your Israeli Mega phone !!
First of all he did NOT say Israel should be destroyed , get your fact straight .
He said the “Zionist regime” should be detroyed , Like the “Apartheid regime” of south Africa had to be destroyed .
Now that didn’t mean any one destroying South Africa , all it took was a “PEN & PAPER” and paper to change the “APARTHIED LAWS ” of South Africa . But then again the south Africans didn’t have the copy of G-D’s real estate licence as you do , correct ?!!
In case you are too busy with your Zio-spin and asking for Iranians blood, Iran has the LARGEST Jewish populatrion in Middle East out of Isreal and has over 20 synagogues only in thier capital city and others in their smallers cities with jewish population .
Oh BTW, they don’t have “only roads” for Muslims and none muslims as Israel has “only roads for Jews” .They DON’Tt occupy any of their neighbors land as oppose to Israel that occupies 3 of her neighbor’s land .They have NOT atatcked any country for over 150 years and they have NOT imported people that have not seen Iran from Across the world to Iran to give them the stolen land of people that have lived there for over 1000’s of years !!
August 3rd, 2006 at 7:10 pm
New Zealand is too far.
Too far what? Or do you just mean too far away? (sorry if it was intended as a joke - I’m pretty sure it was but am not positive….)
August 3rd, 2006 at 7:28 pm
D.I. said…
MOJGAN!
“Do you have reading comprehension problem? “
I Don’t read Hebrew , if that is what you mean !!
“If you think “Hezbollah was for Lebanon’s interest”. Do not agree to an international force and let
Hezbollah keep the “peace”.”
If Israelis are so pro peace how about an international force ***around Gaza ****or as you call it “Aza” ?!! What about an international force around West Bank ? !!How come any international force and international law is only valid when it serves Israel’s purpose ?!!
“Just bare in mind that Israel will fight it till the end. unlike past encounters with Hezbollah, this time there is a sweeping support all around the globe to exterminate Hezbollah.”
Hold your horses , last time it fought Hizbollah for over 18 years . “Sweeping all around the globe ” ? You mean Israel is going carry its terrorism all around the world ?!!or do you call your terrorism “targeted Assassinate ” , which none of teh targets had a trial by any judge and jurry !!!And you call Israel a demoncracy , sorry I meant democracy !
“Hezbollah turned to be a global threatening, up to a point that even most Arab nations would like to see it get off stage.”
I see you are well rehears in repeating the zio-prop you learn from Hasbra !! “Global threat” ?!!
“Most Arab Nations” ?! I am afraid you are confused between Oppressive Usraeli supported puppets and “their nation” .
Hizbollah STRICTLY has targeted Israelis in Lebanon and Israel . It appears that you have a very “small Globe” that only consist of Israel!
“Global Threat”!!LOL
August 3rd, 2006 at 7:31 pm
Canada?! Are you kidding me? Please check out PM Harper’s comments on the war. Harper is a mini G.W.
His rhetoric is so Georgo Bush, I think they have the same speech writer.
The man sold out his own country and gave up on legal rights the US courts afforded Canada on Softwood lumber to the detriment of thousands who work in Canadian mills.
Am sorry Canada has come down to this, but if you have any dreams of the Trudeau era, Harper can only do one thing with his middle finger and it involves self exploration of orifices of your choosing (in ref. to the late Trudeau’s flipping the birdy to Tories in case any reader is wondering what the heck I was talking about). Thanks. Go Ghana!
August 3rd, 2006 at 7:47 pm
Moron 99 said
“why don’t you just tell us what you think is fair? let us assume that the west can control Israel if the arabs can control the extremists.In your opinion, which nations should get which lands?
How should permanent peace be maintained?How should violators be punished? “
Golan hights back to Syria , Shebba farms back to Lebanon ,Israel behind 1967 borders .Of course with some exchange of land regarding Israel’s big settelments , not a Swiss Cheeze kind ,and not a Toxic land for prime agricultural land that Barak offered ! And full diplomatic and political relationship between Israel and all it’s neighbors . Very much the peace plan accepted by 22 Arab nations that the Saudis offered Israel in 2002 and in respond Israelis bombed Araft compound !
If that happens it will pull the rugs from under all the militants and fanatics , it will achieve peace but not the greater Isreal that appears has been Israel’s policy .
August 3rd, 2006 at 8:56 pm
mojgan,
that’s only one third of an answer. How shall it be enforced and how shall violators be punished? and - don’t forget to discuss how many unpunished violations before one of the other parties is free to step in and become the enforcer.
August 3rd, 2006 at 9:27 pm
Mojgan
Really nice answer on the principles. Kind of unrealistic, but nice. It shows you are thinking for a change.
Now there is one thing I have not seen related to in your answer: Jerusalem and more importantly, the temple mount/Haram Al-Sharif
Remind me please the Arab agreement on that.
August 3rd, 2006 at 9:31 pm
I am a canadian I agree with jaeger. The canadian people will not support our troops becoming human sheilds. I do see them maybe taking on a role in the humanitarian side.
The world has changed and so has Canada. Terrorist are surfacing even on our land. The people of Canada do not tolerate terrorism.
August 3rd, 2006 at 9:33 pm
“that’s only one third of an answer. How shall it be enforced and how shall violators be punished? and - don’t forget to discuss how many unpunished violations before one of the other parties is free to step in and become the enforcer. “
Since you are closet suporter of Israel , I let you decide .
considering that Lebanon in past 6 six years has constantly filed a formal report with UN regarding invading its air space on a monthly bases , doing targeted assassination inside Lebanon land , crossing the borders and even shooting an 15 years old unarmed poor Lebanese Sheppard boy last FEB . All verified by UN observers in Lebanon !!So tell us how should have the world community deal with Israel ?!!
August 3rd, 2006 at 9:49 pm
You’re talking about peacekeeping.
So you ment a UN-mission. The Dutch where in Lebanon in the 80’s and the story’s you here now about that period is that it was almost impossible to keep any peace. Nowadays the veterans of that time still finance and sometimes volunteer in an orfin-home for children in the south of Lebanon, they are very worried about the situation. The ‘boys’ are now about 45 year’s of age but they would go there again if they had the chance. The problem is ofcourse that there must be peace before you can do any peacekeeping ! So a NATO Force might be a better option ! Question again, wich country’s ?
August 3rd, 2006 at 10:07 pm
Here is what I would propose.
borders)
Israel withdraws to the borders of resolution 242. Which, as I understand it, is basically 1967 with the exception of some strategic high ground from which mortars or other could be easily lobbed.
maintaining the peace)
Each nation agrees to be held responsible for the actions of its citizens. If the citizens of one nation attack and cause damage to another nation then they are responsible for paying all repair costs as determined by UN inspectors. In addition to property damages there shall be a fine of $10million USD per death, unlawful arrest, or kidnapping and $3million per injury requiring hospitalization for more than 1 week. Casualty figures must also be independantly verified by the UN. If the UN ivestigative efforts are impeded regarding the nationality of perpetrators then the impeding nation is assummed guilty. If UN investigative teams determine fraudulent damage claims then all claims regarding the incident are null and void.
preventing duplicity)
After the sixth incident per calendar year an additional fine of $10million per incident shall be levied. In the case of mortars, rockets, bombs, and landmines each ordinance will be considered as one incident. If a nation is caught trying to create a false incident and blame it upon another then it must pay double the above fines to the nation that it attempted to frame. For example, if Israeli intelligence plants a bomb in tel aviv killing 10 of it’s own citizens and causing $5 million in property damage so that they may frame the state of Palestine then Israel will be required to pay Palestine $210 million USD.
call me naive, but I think that would pretty much ensure the peace. better yet, call me cynical. Because i don’t think olbert, nasrallah, assad, or khameini care nearly so much about people as power. You, me, those babies pulled out the Qana rubble, the israelis cowering in bomb shelters … all of us share one thing in common. We are just common people who don’t count. When we get killed it reinforces their power by rallying all the other sheep around their respective flags. But when you start taking away their money then they lose power rapidly. Then they care.
August 3rd, 2006 at 10:26 pm
oh, sorry, left one out.
Failure of payment)
If one nation is determined to owe damage payments to another but is unable to pay within six months then compensation shall take the form of land purchases made available at $10,000USD per acre. Land along the border shall be divided into 50×50 acre tracts and a random drawing will be made until full compensation is achieved. Upon drawing a tract the 50×50 acre tract immediately behind it shall be added to future lotteries. No land, no matter how strategically important or densely populated is exempt except by mutual agreement. The receiving nation has the option of keeping or displacing any residents. The selling nation bears responsibility of caring for any displaced citizens. The transaction will be internationally recognized as a valid change in borders.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:48 pm
Just send in the Turks and make sure they are bullets in their guns.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:49 pm
I do not agree India is too anti-muslim. On the contrary we Indians are secular. We are among the ones who have been neutral and we have lost lot of Indians there.
August 4th, 2006 at 12:10 am
Mojgan,
you better check UN records as to how many of those violations by Israel occurred immediately after Hezbollah launched rockets over the border to Israel. I think you will be UNpleasently surprised.
August 4th, 2006 at 12:33 am
No sensible nation will send troops to Lebanon as targets, unless they’re allowed to patrol and occupy an area, and kill any Hizbollah fanatics who threaten them. And they won’t even do THIS until Israel kills off a whole bunch more Hizbollah islamofascists.
The world is waiting for the IDF to finish the grim task they’ve started, and then they’ll consider stepping in.
August 4th, 2006 at 12:48 am
Why does Lebanon prefer those countries? Only because they have no prior interactions with them before?
Lebanon is a relatively anti-American country, so I don’t see much value to helping them.
August 4th, 2006 at 12:52 am
I’m somewhat surprised at the removal of Italy from the list of possible candidates. American media reporting at the time of the ‘82-’83 mission — the purpose of which was largely to protect the PLO from the IDF, something few Americans seemed to realize — was that the Italians were the only peacekeepers who were welcome in Lebanon. Of course, things can change in 20+ years.
My acceptance criterion — as an American who wants Hezbollah defanged — would be that whoever the peacekeepers are, they have the means and the will to shoot back if necessary. There is a stereotype of UN peacekeepers standing idly by while massacres take place. Note that one alternative suggestion, that it be a NATO force, is tantamount to inviting the US in, since nearly all (the figure I have heard is 97%) of deployable NATO forces are American. But as Mustapha notes, an American force would entail its own risks.
Besides the primary objective of minimizing armed conflict, there are numerous secondary objectives, including gaining the trust of the population (thus the nomination of Brazil, Canada, and Japan) and promoting the growth of a healthy civil society, from which a fully legitimized Lebanese polity can come into being and obtain a monopoly on the use of force within its nominal territory.
August 4th, 2006 at 1:01 am
I haven’t read all the comments yet, just the first 20 or so. However, I’d like to point out that any international force in Lebenon will not be peacekeepers.
Their mission will be to continue to exterminate Hezbollah, and any Lebonese who support the Hez.
For those posting from Lebenon, you need to decide. Stop Hezbollah now by any means possible, or there will be no more Beirut. No international force will be forthcoming to save you.
You are committing national suicide, live on TV. For what? For the right to continue to bomb Israel?
It is reported that 80% of the population supports Hezbollah. Obviously, there are very few innocents around to worry about. What part of the Lebonese credo longs for its children to die.
Showing your people to be as bezerk as the Iraqis under Shiia/Iranian control, is disgusting. Stop with the excuses.
August 4th, 2006 at 1:02 am
You don’t need more peacekeepers. That’s been done already and look what it got you.
The only way Lebanon — and the Middle East — is going to have peace is to face down the fanatics like Hezbollah, Iran and the rest.
August 4th, 2006 at 1:11 am
I doubt a NATO force is the answer for Lebanon. I think basically what is needed is a force that can keep Hizbollah in its place until the Lebanese Army is ready.
Any peace/cease fire plan must include a program to strengthen the Lebanese Army.
August 4th, 2006 at 1:16 am
This is great.
Let’s see, who do we like enough to come in and get their asses shot off us. Dude, you might want to think about who is WANTS to come in and fight a bunch of fanatics for you. Right now the list is pretty short.
Like so short that everyone is just sitting back and letting the Israelis clean out Hizbullah. And that isn’t working out so great, is it?
If I had a Lebanese blog, I’d probably be a bit less cavalier about who could come into my country to fix the problems that (let’s see) maybe the Lebanese had something to do with.
Glad you don’t want my country. I lost too many friends the last time.
August 4th, 2006 at 1:19 am
I think a NATO force is not the answer — I like the Japan, Brazil, Canada idea. I do think the force needs some teeth and needs to keep Hezbollah in its place until the Lebanese Army can take over the border.
Any peace plan must include a plan to strengthen the Lebanese Army.
August 4th, 2006 at 1:24 am
FFL, obviously, with Turks filling the gaps, under a non-French NATO command structure.
FFL is incredibly expendable, and the French don’t tolerate attacks on their troops. Ask the folks in the Ivory Coast.
No, the Lebanese aren’t going to like folks who will actually engage and kill Hezbollah when the Hezbollards refuse to disarm, but, hey, that’s kind of the idea.
August 4th, 2006 at 3:06 am
I certainly understand your thought process, but I think you are missing a major point. A peacekeeping force in Lebanon will have to be more complicated than simply handing boxes of food to mothers and candy to babies. For Israel to be willing to accept a peacekeeping force, that force must be willing to kill HA by any means necessary. Having the people of Lebanon respect the peacekeeping force has very little importance.
In order to be able to effectively destroy HA, the peacekeeping force must be able to intimidate Syria and Iran. To put it quite simply, a force under the UN banner can’t do that. Very few countries can. NATO, the US, Russia, and China can intimidate Syrian and Iran. But that’s it. There is nobody else. NATO means the US; and Russia and China have no reason to want to help, nor would they want to intimidate Syria or Iran. And it should be obvious that the US is unwilling to help with a peacekeeping force.
The solution? There is none. Whatever peacekeeping force will be a temporary fix. Lebanon is not strong enough to fight both Syria and Iran so HA will continue to gain strength. Unless HA attacks the US, Russia, or China in a major way (or a NATO ally), HA will continue to have power in Lebanon. That is, unless the US attacks Syria or Iran.
August 4th, 2006 at 3:11 am
Please don’t let Lebanon go on a nit picking we are fussy about who we would “like” to end our misery. I am pleased that you don’t want Australia. We are very stretched. Not just Iraq and Afghanistan, but we are kept very busy in the South Pacific and East Timor, even though we are pulling out of there. And we are quite happy to be considered a good friend of the US.
As to the UN is under funded, who do the Lebanese think pay for these UN forces. Certainly not Brazil. Or Russia or China etc. The US, and Japan contributes huge sums for the bankrolling of UN forces. So Japan’s money wouldn’t be on the nose, but their well trained professional troops would.
As far as I know the US has not changed its policy of not putting their troops under UN command. So I doubt they want to. To start with they would be mad to allow the UN access to their military intelligence. They have even been burned by NATO traitors. But anyway for the Lebanese US troops won’t be acceptable. The experience and firepower they have to save you from Hizbollah doesn’t matter. Or the reality is once again there is no desire to confront Hizbollah
That certain troops are considered not nice by Lebanese isn’t enough. Whoever they are they have to be able to do the job, and not be corrupt and abusers of the locals. Like stay well away from African troops, they about 2 months ago attacked and killed women and children in the Congo, and are notorious for the sex abuse of women and children. Kofi was not outraged. And there are a number of ME troops you wouldn’t want either.
Time for a reality check.
And of course they will have to go in under a chapter 7. This stand and watch as the Dutch did in Srebrenica, well actually they forced the Muslim men and boys onto the buses of death, or the Belgians in Rwanda, who just hopped in their vehicles and drove away, exemplifies the appalling moral vacuum that is the UN.
One solution is to have a lot of female troops, how would that go down with Hizbollah.
And if Lebanon requires for Hizbollah anything less than a chapter 7 then they will end up on their own permanently.
August 4th, 2006 at 3:58 am
As a Canadian I can say there would be little support for our troops getting shot at by Hizbollah terrorists in Lebanon. Even the previous Liberal government classified them as terrorists. Getting in the way (again) of errant Israeli bombs is also pretty low on our priority list. There is little support in Canada for our troops being in Afganistan, let alone Lebanon also. We just don’t particulary care enough about the troubles in a very minor country with little connection to to Canada to allow our troops to be shot at on a regular basis. If all you want us to do is watch and count people getting killed (as long as they are not Canadian peackeepers) that would OK, but pointless.
As for the person who mentioned “Trudeau’s flipping the birdy to Tories” I am not sure where he learnt his Canadian history, but he must have failed. Trudeau gave the finger to protesters in Salmon Arm BC, who were not necessarily Tories as NDPers didn’t like him much at the time either. The Trudeau salute, and the National debt, is what his legacy is.
August 4th, 2006 at 4:02 am
Mustapha, how about Mongolia? Mongolian troops have become more and more involved in peacekeeping missions in recent years (higher international profile and warm feelings translate into international support for resisting Chinese and Russian influence). They’re in Sierra Leone right now guarding the Special Court.
August 4th, 2006 at 4:04 am
You people got yourselves into this by not standing up to Hezbollah so you can get yourselves out of it. I am Canadian and I can assure you that most of us want nothing to do with “peacekeeping” in Lebanon. A post above notes that the Canadian government considers Hezbollah to be a terrorist organization - which it is. Thankfully, we now have a Prime Minister who is willing to stand up and declare that Canada is truly a part of the West (and, yes, with America) instead of some adjunct to corrupt, weak and opportunistic EU lead by the likes of France. Perhaps “Claude” above takes pride in the fact that we are not actively helping the Israelis but from his name, I’m assuming he is from Quebec and Quebec is NOT Canada and does NOT speak for Canada.
August 4th, 2006 at 4:51 am
I like the proposal by Moron99. Then maybe Israel wouldn’t have enough money left to continue to buy votes in the American Congress. If only someone had bankrolled Lebanon to the same extent before this latest mess. The aquisition of Shebaa Farms, the release of prisoners, and the whole raison d’etre for the Hizbollah would have been eliminated. But now?
Don’t count on Canada…yet. But with only 30% support now the Harper government won’t last long.
August 4th, 2006 at 5:49 am
canada has a leader now that might be willing to send more troops abroad, if we had more troops to send abroad. im all for our missions in afganistan and elsewhere and i think we should be more involved but i honestly don’t think we have the numbers for any kind of significant force in lebanon, the canadian forces only have about 50,000 members i believe. thankfully harper is on better terms with bush, so if we do send more troops overseas the americans can defend our already poorly defended frontiers(not that they don’t already).
August 4th, 2006 at 6:13 am
Liam:
I am from Atlantic Canada although I agree on most issues the statement of Quebec is not part of Canada I disagree. Claude is entitled to his own opinion. Remember freedom of speech.
Don’t forget we are trying to sell our way of life to the middle east. Slandering a fellow canadian not setting a good example.
August 4th, 2006 at 6:41 am
Lets face it, international peacekeeping in a role like this is not about ‘warm and fuzzy’ feelings towards the peacekeepers as this topic seems to suggest.
Its about who is competent to do the job.
Do you seriously think the countries you proposed are competent to do the hardest peacekeeping task so far? No offence, Canada, but you really have lost the plot recently. And Brazil? Give me a break! Japan won’t go anywhere except to build hospitals and drainage ditches. None of the countries you mentioned have any real experience in recent warfighting, except at most as a support role.
There are precious few countries able to do this job. The Israelis have suggested Britain, France, Italy and Turkey. I doubt that Turkey can do it, but they are Muslim and so they are less likely to be attacked. Frankly, Britain and France are probably the only two non-US armed forces competent to keep the peace in a war zone.
Finally, who the Hell wants to help Lebanon anyway? The majority of the people support Hezbollah, a terrorist organisation. That means the whole country will be against any peacekeepers that volunteer.
I say let the Israeli’s sort ‘em out.
August 4th, 2006 at 6:43 am
It’s an honour just to be nominated…As a Canadian and knowing a fair bit about the Canadian Forces I can assure you that Canada is not coming to Lebanon. We simply do not have the troops. Which is a shame but there it is.
I would also note that if Canada did come it would be with the express mission of disarming Hezbollah and bringing actual peace to the area. I hope that this would be a position which the Lebonese would support. But if it was not the fact would remain that the Canadians would use those rules of engagement.
And, by the way, the new CCPC government in Canada, despite what its partisan foes might be saying, is simply re-aligning our foreign policy with our traditional allies in the Anglosphere and our friends in Israel. The BS “honest broker” approach is toast. So be careful what you wish for.
August 4th, 2006 at 6:49 am
And if there was a problem in Briasil, Canada, or Japan, how many peacekeepers would Lebanon have supplied?
Don’t you think the countries that are providing funds and lives should have some interest in the wellbeing of Lebanon?
Canada couldn’t even get their rapid response force to the tsunami.
August 4th, 2006 at 6:58 am
Hysterical post, man. I agree completely.
But Chile isn’t poor. It’s just too unrecognizable in Lebanon.
What about South Africa? Too many ties to Israel during the apartheid era?
I know that the Shia, Druze, and Christians in Ibl Saqi would love it if the Norwegians came back. The Norwegian troops were loved, and they loved Lebanon. Many of them married Lebanese.
August 4th, 2006 at 7:03 am
mustapha,
it’s your neighbor speaking…haven’t you learnt anything from life, from history? get your ass out of the hamam and start fighting for your homes, fields and cities. no poutside peacekeeping choclate soldier will shed one drop of sweat for your own good and interest, not to mention a drop of blood. your laziness is shown by the way you choose your favorite countries, like a spoiled girl choosing her cloths. that’s why leabanon looks like it looks today, and in the last 35 years - you’re waiting for outside deus ex machina solution. you’re daydreaming mustapha, wake up!
August 4th, 2006 at 8:51 am
Liam, last time I checked, Quebec was indeed part of Canada. Quebec represents 24% of the Canadian population. Even if we discount half of them as ‘non-Canadian’, (as you would say) because they support sovereignty, that still leaves almost 4 million people. More than Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and of course all the Atlantic Provinces. But for some reason, you are discounting the entire province???
And by the way, no I’m not from Quebec. I was born and raised in Ottawa, and spent 7 years in the Canadian Armed Forces. How’s that for being Canadian. Judging someone purely by their name is truly an asinine thing to do. ‘Liam’ is of Irish origin. Does that mean you’re the son of a poor immigrant leech who got tired of potatoes and now lives in a hick town somewhere in the Prairies? Of course not.
So now please remind us again why YOU somehow speak for ALL Canadians?
August 4th, 2006 at 1:52 pm
Hmmm.
Canda? Brazil? Japan?
Why not select Tongo as well. All three of those countries have militaries with significant issues when deploying infantry, which would be required. Canada, under the Liberals, has spent the past 30 years elminating it’s military effectiveness. Brazil doesn’t have a highly trained army capable of actual ground combat operations in southern Lebanon. And Japan hasn’t committed ground troops to combat operations since WWII. Even in Iraq the Japanese troops require Coalition forces to guard them.
There is no way that Israel would accept this.
August 4th, 2006 at 4:02 pm
Unfortunately, our current PM, Stephen Harper, has moved Canada from our position of neutrality to one of supporting fully the American and Israeli position (I’m not unsympathetic with the concerns of Israeli civilians, but the response has been… out of proportion to the crime committed). That said, Harper’s approval rating has fallen substantially as a result of his government’s position; his is not the policy of Canadians as a people.
August 4th, 2006 at 4:42 pm
There is a country that has a reasonably large army that should be able to act as a peacekeeping/peacemaking force in southern Lebanon.
That country is… Lebanon! It has an army of 70,000 men. It has a duty to maintain the territorial integrety of its nation, meaning a duty to not allow a non-state militia to be running around and effectively co-opting Lebanese foreign policy.
All of the “reasons” I’ve heard until now as to why the Lebanese army “could not occupy southern Lebanon and control Hizbollah fighthers” have been excuses.
Israel had to do something very similiar to this within two months of it birth, when in June 1948, the provisional gov’t made the painful decision to take military action against the Irgun rather than allow it to continue as a distinct military force, apart from the IDG. After this point, taken during the dark days of Israel’s fight for its very existance, there were no separate Jewish militias running around - all military units became under the command of the Israeli government.
Of course, the Lebanese Army may need help in terms of logistics, air support, communications, etc. So *that* should be the role of any outside militaries - but not to interpose these outside groups in southern Lebanon - that will just insure a repetition of the 28-year failure of UNIFIL.
August 4th, 2006 at 7:21 pm
Claude:
Good Christ, you are so literal. When I said that Quebec was not part of Canada, I was referring to mentality not geography. I’m sure this Mustapha couldn’t care less about Canada’s internal politics but, since it touches on the “root cause” of the troubles in his own country, here goes. This mentality is certainly not exclusive to Quebec but it finds its spiritual home there. It has nothing to do with sovereignist/federalist or even English/French and you are apparently living proof it can exist outside of Quebec. It is a closed, elitist - one could say “tribal” mindset - that pre-determines the reaction to every event regardless of the facts on the ground. Every reaction is a knee-jerk response not a well-reasoned conclusion. In this worldview, the Americans and anyone who is allied with them are eternally evil. Coming from Ottawa which, geographically (and in other ways), is in the pocket of Quebec, you should recognize this way of thinking. It is the mindset that prides itself on not sticking up for the Israelis who are part of our Western world and defends the UN no matter how often it is revealed to be ineffectual and corrupt. It seems to me that Lebanon is similarly affected. Hence why I commented that Lebanon got itself into this mess by itself. At the end of the day, they would rather be anti-Israeli than pro-Lebanon. Until they rid themselves of this tribal mentality, all the “peace keepers” in the world won’t help their situation in the least. And, yes, for the record I am the descendant of “poor immigrant leeches” who got tired of living in the miserable bog of Catholic Ireland and yearned to live in the modern and open Western world. I, and I truly believe when push comes to shove, most other Canadians, proudly support those defending that way of life against the medieval mindset of the Islamists.
August 4th, 2006 at 8:11 pm
I’m an American. Let me first say that I love aussies (hat tip to Ros) because they and perhaps the Poles seem to be the only other countries with the balls to stand against the overwhelming anti-American propaganda that the candy-assed left in Europe spews out and which is readily ingested by their former colonies. Bottom line: What has America done but shed our own peoples blood to preside over the longest period of peace and properity in history? Hm? It makes me laugh to hear a Canadian or any other beneficiary of the “courageous nations” (read: gb, aust. japan, poland, usa, iraq, denmark) complain as they slice more and more away from their defense budget. I love the lebanese people i’ve met and it sucks what’s going on there but shit happens. It did on 9/11 here in America and after having a good cry, we and some courageous friends got off our ass and did something about it. If lebanon had the balls, they would have shut hizbollah down w/ having to rely on the israelies to do it for them. Freedom has a price - a price that must be paid every day with blood, sweat and alas tears.
August 5th, 2006 at 1:33 am
The American who posted at 8:11.
I appriciate what you said about Poles, we have guts… we always had. And you should do something about that visa thing for Poles coming to visit your country.
But your though about Lebanon is completly wrong. They had only 2 years to get rid of Hezbollah (Syria ocupation) and Hezbollah is one of most dangerus military groups in Middle East. Lebanon didn’t won’t civil war, thats all, they tried to decrese Hezbollah power by diplomacy, but this is slow way. U must know that diplomacy and democracy is good way to resolve things, Lebanon tried that way but Israel losed petiance. Things like that happens. I hope UN force will move soon and help both countries… to get rid of damn Hezbollah and their supporters.
August 5th, 2006 at 6:07 am
Whatever their nationality, it is essential that they have clear rules of engagement that makes it their duty to engage the Israelis and stop from savaging Lebanon. Maybe then there would be real peace and we would see some long due forceful response to the endless sovereignty violations we have been witnessing from the southern side of the border.
August 5th, 2006 at 1:47 pm
Whatever peace keeping force comes is going to be tasked with disarming Hezb’allah. They will be operating under permissive rules of engagement. This means the peace keeping force will be taking fire from Hezb’allah. It is more than likely that they will use Israeli medical facilities and rely on the Israeli air force in emergencies. They aren’t going to be neutral.
Historical triva questions:
What airforce that saved Jordan’s government by overflying Syrians tank columns in the 1980 when Yasser Arafat tried to take over Jordan?
August 5th, 2006 at 5:18 pm
Canada is no longer the country that it has been historically. Our former government did not support the Iraq war but the New Conservative government that came into power in January 2006 led by Stephen Harper would have. At the time he was very angry at our government’s stand against the Iraq war. Furthermore, the New Conservative party’s foreign policies are almost identical to the United States. Harper publicly supports Israel in the Israel/Palestinian conflict and also in the new conflict with Lebanon. Our media and, in particular, our newspapers are largely under Zionist control and censorship. In other words our citizens are becoming brainwashed. We are no longer deserving of our reputation as peacekeepers. I wish we could help, but our country can no longer be trusted.
August 5th, 2006 at 7:16 pm
In response to Liam:
Israel, part of “our Western world”? Are you kidding me?
When I brought up the UN, I was not making a comment about its effectiveness or non-effectiveness. In fact, I agree with you that the UN has become quite ineffectual over the years. Rather, I brought the voting record of its members. And it is this voting record which we can use as a coarse gauge for Israeli support throughout the world for its actions. It is pretty non-existent.
Yes, I am proud that Canada hasn’t actively supported the Israelis, and that makes me part of the VAST majority of the world that doesn’t condone Israeli actions over the past decades. The regional parties affected by this ongoing conflict (and in fact the entire world) know that international opinion is overwhelmingly against Israel. And were it not for American support (political, military, and economic), Israel would have had no choice but to ease back due to international pressure. Not only in this current situation, but in countless others in the past.
Again, don’t make assumptions. I have never met anyone who actually believes that “Americans […] are eternally evil” and I certainly don’t think that. I mean, come on! I DO see the US as being the “shining beacon on the hill”, and the rightful leader of the free world. Having said that however, they are not perfect, and I believe their handling of (and interfering in) Israeli-Palestinian politics has been atrocious, and has made things worse rather than better.
And damn! “I […] proudly support those defending that way of life against the medieval mindset of the Islamists.” Wow. You’ve shown your racist streak, loud and clear. Yes, some Islamists have a medieval mindset (every religion has its fundamentalists and its freaks), but you certainly can’t lump all Muslims together like that.
August 5th, 2006 at 11:51 pm
Claude:
So, you’ve never met anyone who feels that Americans are “eternally evil”? And you come from where …???? I travel to Ottawa frequently and I can assure you I’ve encounterd that attitude many times - and from educated people who should know better. So either you’re being disingenuous or you don’t get out much. I hate to burst your bubble but that attitude is very prevalent in our oh so tolerant Canada.
And while we’re on the subject of tolerance, that would appear to be a one-way street for you. You accuse me of showing a “racist streak”. Geez - and you claim I make assumptions! I did not “lump all Muslims together”. Go back and read my post. I specifically referred to an “Islamist” mindset. In current political discourse, that term refers to Islamic terrorists not all Muslims. Of course, accusing people of racism is a time-honoured Leftie Canadian way of shutting down debate. However, I note you begin your post by derisively dismissing the fact that Israel belongs to the family of Western nations.
No, dude, I’m not kidding you. When you have a modern, open, forward-thinking democratic society, you are, by definition, part of the West. You would only dispute that definition if you’re one of those types that believes Zionism equals racism but can always be counted on to provide an alibi for anti-semitism.
So you see, my dear Mustapha, whoever you are, we Canadians are in no position to fix your house as our own is in such moral disarray.
August 6th, 2006 at 9:05 pm
Liam, ‘dude’.
No matter what we each say, we will continue trying to punch wholes in each other’s arguments. The bottom line is we both have very different opinions on many things, and as much as I respect your views, I think we’ll have to agree to disagree, or else this could go on forever. And frankly, I’ve spent too much time on this already, and I have better things to do. I’m sure you do as well.
All the best.