More To Be Proud Of
Our government's official line:
So, basically, our State Department is demented.
WASHINGTON (AFP) - The United States declined to join calls for an immediate ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah, insisting such a pact would only be a temporary fix for the worsening crisis.[Emphasis mine.]
"What ... everybody wants to see is a cessation of violence," said State Department spokesman Sean McCormack.
"But nobody wants to see a cessation of violence done in such a way that you end up back where we are today at some point in the future."
A United Nations team, European Union foreign ministers and other key political players have called for a ceasefire, but Hezbollah has already rejected such a step on terms laid down by Israel.
A senior State Department official meanwhile spelled out Washington's objections to an immediate ceasefire.
"A ceasefire is a very specific term," the official said. It implies some sort of temporary status.
"You want to get to a place where you actually have a cessation of violence not only in the immediate term, but the longer term. Ceasefire implies a state of suspended hostilities which is not what you want," the official said.
"In order to have a lasting cessation of hostilities, you have to take those steps where the government of Lebanon exercises control over its entire space and Hezbollah is dismantled," the official said.
The official's comments bolstered the view of analysts who have interpreted Washington's statements on the crisis to mean that the Bush administration wants to allow Israel space to wipe out Hezbollah's infrastructure.
Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert on Friday said a ceasefire would only be considered on three conditions: that Hezbollah release two captured Israeli soldiers, the firing of Hezbollah rockets on Israeli towns cease, and that the militia be disarmed in line with a UN resolution.
In Damascus, Iran's Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki, whose country is a key backer of Hezbollah along with
Syria, called for a ceasefire and an exchange of prisoners between Israel and Arab militants.
"We need to reflect in a reasonable and just manner so that we can put an end to the crisis," Mottaki said after talks Monday with President Bashar al-Assad. "A ceasefire could be pronounced which would be followed by an exchange."
So, basically, our State Department is demented.
no subject
When the 1947 UN Partition Plan (UN General Assy Resolution 181) partitioned the land into Jewish and Arab states, the plan was unacceptable to the Arab inhabitants from the very beginning. From Wikipedia: "The Arab leadership (in and out of Palestine) opposed the plan, arguing that it violated the rights of the majority of the people in Palestine, which at the time was 67% non-Jewish (1,237,000) and 33% Jewish (608,000). Arab leaders also argued a large number of Arabs would be trapped in the Jewish State as a minority. While some Arab leaders opposed the right of the Jews for self-determination in the region, others criticised (sic) the amount and quality of land given to Israel. (The proposal, however, was not solely for the Jews in Palestine but for a secure homeland for Jews outside of Palestine.)"
"The 33 countries that voted in favor of the partition, as set by UN resolution 181: Australia, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Belarus, Canada, Costa Rica, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, France, Guatemala, Haiti, Iceland, Liberia, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Sweden, South Africa, Ukraine, United States, USSR, Uruguay, Venezuela.
The 13 countries that voted against UN Resolution 181: Afghanistan, Cuba, Egypt, Greece, India, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, Yemen."
I think we can look at the last 60 years of history, nod, and say, "that was predictable." Maybe we should tell the Israeli government that they need to draft a peace treaty acceptable to all parties, and until they do, the U.S. is going to cut off financial support. Yes, they will have to give up land, including good land, water, settlements, and money. But I believe every conflict has a line of compromise that will dissatisfy all parties equally. How else will there ever be peace there? Blowing the opposition into the dark ages with U.S.-made weapons does not make me proud. You?
no subject
The only treaty the Hizbullah and Hamas will accept is one that includes our destruction.That result is unacceptable(at least to me), so we're stuck with fighting them until someone manages to find a way to make them wither and die, or change radically.I also recommend you read *this* (http://sandmonkey.org/2006/07/17/our-left-their-left/) before you continue, and take into account we've been at peace with Egypt for the last 20-30 years.