From: shaig@Think.COM (Shai Guday)
Subject: Re: was:Go Hezbollah!
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA
Lines: 81
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: composer.think.com

In article <1993Apr16.130037.18830@ncsu.edu>, hernlem@chess.ncsu.edu (Brad Hernlem) writes:
|> 
|> In article <2BCE0918.6105@news.service.uci.edu>, tclock@orion.oac.uci.edu (Tim Clock) writes:
|> |> 
|> |> Are you suggesting that, when guerillas use the population for cover, Israel
|> |> should totally back down? So...the easiest way to get away with attacking
|> |> another is to use an innocent as a shield and hope that the other respects
|> |> innocent lives?
|> 
|> Tell me Tim, what are these guerillas doing wrong? Assuming that they are using
|> civilians for cover, are they not killing SOLDIERS in THEIR country? If the
|> buffer zone is to prevent attacks on Israel, is it not working? Why is it 
|> further neccessary for Israeli guns to pound Lebanese villages? Why not just
|> kill those who try to infiltrate the buffer zone? You see, there is more to
|> the shelling of the villages.... it is called RETALIATION... "GETTING BACK"
|> ..."GETTING EVEN". It doesn't make sense to shell the villages. The least
|> it shows is a reckless disregard by the Israeli government for the lives of
|> civilians.

If you recall, a subject was raised some weeks ago that touched upon
this.  When someone claimed that guerillas were manifestations of
popular sentiment, the topic arose:"When does a civilian stop
becoming a civilian?".  If he houses and shelters guerillas of
his own free will, aiding them, has he violated his "civilian" status?

|> |> What? So the whole bit about attacks on Israel from neighboring Arab states 
|> |> can start all over again? While I also hope for this to happen, it will
|> |> only occur WHEN Arab states show that they are *prepared* to take on the 
|> |> responsibility and the duty to stop guerilla attacks on Israel from their 
|> |> soil. They have to Prove it (or provide some "guaratees"), there is no way
|> |> Israel is going to accept their "word"- not with their past attitude of 
|> |> tolerance towards "anti-Israel guerillas in-residence".
|> 
|> If Israel is not willing to accept the "word" of others then, IMHO, it has
|> no business wasting others' time coming to the peace talks. 

But don't you see that the same statement can be made both ways?
If Lebanon was interested in peace then it should accept the word
of Israel that the attacks were the cause for war and disarming the
Hizbollah will remove the cause for its continued occupancy.  Afterall,
Israel has already staged two parts of the withdrawal from areas
it occupied in Lebanon during SLG.

|> Tim, you are ignoring the fact that the Palestinians in Lebanon have been
|> disarmed. Hezbollah remains the only independent militia. Hezbollah does
|> not attack Israel except at a few times such as when the IDF burned up
|> Sheikh Mosavi, his wife, and young son. Of course, if Israel would withdraw
|> from Lebanon and stop assassinating people and shelling villages they wouldn't
|> make the Lebanese so mad as to do that. Furthermore, with Hezbollah 
|> subsequently disarmed, it would not be possible.

That is not exactly true.  The Hizbollah and their affiliated groups
have made several attempts to infiltrate the border of Israel.

|> |> It has not. Without the support, and active involvement, of Syria,
|> |> Lebanon would not have been able to accomplish all that has occurred.
|> |> Once Syria leaves who is to say that Lebanon will be able to retain 
|> |> control? If Syria stays thay may be even more dangerous for Israel.
|> 
|> Tim, when is the last time that you recall any trouble on the Syrian border?
|> Not lately, eh?
|> 
|> Israel knows very well that the Syrians are able to restrain ALL who would use
|> territory under their control to attack Israel. While Lebanon would be better
|> off with Syria and Israel out of its borders, the presence of Syrian troops
|> in Lebanon has meant a sharp decrease in attacks on Israeli territory (not on
|> Israeli troops in Lebanon, however. Please note the distinction) in the
|> past two years.

True, but the Syrians did allow (until at least 1984) guerillas to operate
in the areas that were under their control, provided that those guerillas
were attacking Israeli lines.

The problem is that Syria is also not as stable a partner for long term
peace as others in the area might be.

-- 
Shai Guday              | Stealth bombers,
OS Software Engineer    |
Thinking Machines Corp. |	the winged ninjas of the skies.
Cambridge, MA           |