An Israel with Hezbollah on its border attacking them for 11 months straight; and moving forward threatening to to attack them anytime they do something Hezbollah doesn't like is not an Israel that can thrive. Hezbollah has shown themselves to be an existential threat to Israel's existence, that cannot be ignored moving forward.

Israel pretty much has to do whatever it takes to take away Hezbollah's ability to intimidate, threaten and attack them. It is going to result in a lot of bad for everyone except for the IRI (especially the people of Lebanon); but Israel literally doesn't have a choice if it wants to be a functional first world country that thrives.

Now if there is a diplomatic solution where Hezbollah agrees to abandon the border of Israel or better yet dissolve; then that is preferable. But if Hezbollah refuses to abandon the border at a minimum, Israel literally has to do what it takes to neutralize the threat. Even if it "doesn't do much good."

I mean, if you are radical Islamists sycophant and want Israel to be destroyed, and dont care how many people are killed and nations destroyed in the process, then carry on. But if that isn't the case, at some point you have to accept the IRI and its proxies are presenting an existential threat to Israel, and at some point will be dealt with as such.

The IRI gives Hamas and Houthis weapons, but has no control over their tactics. Hezbollah is a proper IRI proxy that is kept on pretty short leash. It wasn't an accident the IRI ambassador to Lebanon was injured by the pager attack, as it was his Hezbollah issued pager. That is the level of control IRI has over Hezbollah, and Lebanon itself.

Many incorrect things about this statement.

First off, Persian is an ethnicity, that is the majority in Iran, but Iran is not an ethnostate (nor unlike Palestine does it even aspire to be) and there are many ethnicities.

Second, the IRI is horribly unpopular (for very good reason) among all Iranians, including Persians; which is why I make a point to emphasize Hezbollah is an IRI proxy, not an Iranian one.

We should also amend Hezbollah is a rational actor if you accept they are acting on behalf of the IRI. IF they were acting on behalf of Lebanon, or even Palestinians, their actions would be completely irrational.

This war has destroyed any argument Hezbollah has that its weapons protect the Lebanese, and in fact, they bring calamities upon the Lebanese. I call for an immediate halt to the support front before the disaster worsens, and we call for separating the path, surrendering to the state and its army, implementing international resolutions, facilitating the election of a president, opening a workshop for frankness and reconciliation, and sitting around the table and presenting our concerns to build Lebanon on solid foundations.









To Hezbollah: You were calling for unity of the arenas but they all abandoned you. Will you continue to make sacrifices? Enough, stop the absurd war, war is not destiny but a decision. If you want to give examples, I would mention Iran, which did not accept sacrificing its people for the sake of anyone’s support, and the same goes for Syria, which neutralized itself.








Israel seems to be getting the exact response they wanted from this bombing campaign. The international community, Israeli civilians, and even Lebanon political parties are more or less supporting Israel. Israel has had similar responses twice before, and each time Israel invaded and united all of Lebanon against Israel. A ground invasion would be a big risk for a very questionable reward.

disgusting propaganda in support of mass terroristic bombing. I would not expect anything less.

This is basic politics, and not the least bit surprising. It's also a completely believable and legitimate response to what is an extremely predictable outcome from Hezbollah's actions. It's not propaganda.

(Going to assume you are attacking the Kataeb party for attacking Hezbollah and not me for posting it as an example of reactions from inside Lebanon.)

oh right a member of a far right collaborationist party supports Israel. who cares what this guy says?



why do Western liberals love the far right of every single country is a good question though.

ya it may def be "basic politics" to you that when a genocidal foreign regime does mass murder and mass terrorism then the natural inclination is to collaborate with them and sell out the country. maybe thats basic to you. me, I know for damn sure what I would have been doing in Europe, Vietnam, Algeria, India, South Africa, and Lebanon.

When did I say I loved that party?

Discounting one of Lebanon's most significant religious groups as "far right" because they are right wing shows an extreme bias. If anything this is more propaganda than any other part of this discussion.

Especially when simultaneously supporting Hezbollah who murdered Lebanon's Prime Minister and forced militant activities upon the country, plunging the country into extremism.

The Phlange committed the Sabra-Shatilla massacres after the IDF opened the gates (and listened to 12 hours of shooting and screaming).

I didnt say anything about the religious group. I said the Kataeb party was far right. wiki lists them as right wing. wiki also says this:




if you want to quibble that they are just plain old "right wing" and not "far right" then ok whatever, not really worth my time.

however, as BH points out, this party were the ghouls who did one of the worst massacre of our lifetimes in Sabra and Shatila.

if this is who you want to represent to Lebanon then it is no real surprise considering your stance on the right wing in other countries, but I dont take this guy seriously at all.

and btw, BGP, you should call up the UN and tell them that they got it wrong

That was a horrific event. It occurred 40 years ago, during a war that saw widespread extreme violence.

If I can separate the political wing of Hamas from the military wing responsible for the terrorist act just a year ago (outside of a hot war like the Lebanese Civil War) then I can also view the political wing of Kataeb as separate from its military actions during an extremely violent period from 40 years ago. This separation does not excuse the atrocity, just as my view of Hamas does not excuse October 7th.

I'm not going to cast Shia Muslims as far right because of the War of the Camps

I'm not going to cast Druze as far right even though elements enacted large scale massacres against Christian communities

I'm not going to cast the Palestinians as far right because they contributed to widespread violence at the start of the war

I'm not even going to completely discount Hezbollah after their role in the conflict and their continued attacks until today.

If we go back 40 years to highlight atrocities as a reason to label entire groups extremist, we would find nearly every faction guilty. That would leave no one worth engaging with.

I wasn't aware. Not really worth looking into for the purposes of this discussion, there's plenty of other actions Hezbollah has taken which can be substituted in.

Anyways back to my original point: Israel has largely gotten the response it wanted from this bombing campaign. Escalating it to an invasion would be a mistake, even if short term it helps to get Northern Israel back to normal quicker.

We've seen this play out twice already in 2006 and 1982. I hope they don't invade, but also expect them to.

they will invade bc they want to steal the land. thats the whole point of the project.

What do you think their goal will if they do end up invading? Presumably something they can't achieve if you think it would be a mistake?

I think they just want their people who live in northern Israel to be able to go home.

Makes me think of the Chappelle skit where keeping it real goes wrong.

This article gives a great overview of the situation:

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c93pg1qpxxzo


I think that this accurately describes Israel's 3 main goals:

The only goal I think is good here is the third: getting Hezbollah to stop firing rockets at Israel.

I think the first two goals are just straight up bad. Hezbollah is unlikely to be completely dismantled, and even if it is that doesn't mean that another group doesn't take Hezbollah's place (likely a splinter faction of a destroyed Hezbollah). Even if Israel invades and is able to get rid of Hezbollah, that would be a very short term political victory, and it would mostly be for an Israeli audience. A political solution that accomplishes the third goal would be far better for Israel in the longterm since they've lost so much standing with the international community and this would help restore some of that.

Overall an invasion would result in achieving short term goals more quickly while setting back all of Israel's long term goals.

A retired vet of the Lebanese Army with his wife and three daughters blown to bits, supposedly... PW, were these fair game? Who really knows what the daughters were concoting, other than a wedding but its better safe than sorry.



Unsurprisingly, the one remaining member of the families thoughts ...

"We are a nationalistic family with no party affiliation, though of course we stand with everyone who resists aggression," Reda Gharib said, noting no member of the family was a member of Hezbollah.

But he says that now, having lost his family, he wanted Hezbollah to continue fighting Israel "until victory" and not to accept any negotiations.

If Hezbollah hadn’t been shooting missiles into Israel for the past year those people would still be alive.

The citizens of Gaza did vote. They voted for Hamas, whose stated goal was the destruction of Israel. Was that the sort of moral position you agree with?

Are you suggesting that there should be a single state solution, in which the citizens of Israel are subsumed into a new Arab majority country? That is your "moral" conclusion? Yikes.

Instead of demanding that Palestinians live in peace, and stop attacking Israel, and in so doing make it possible for a Palestinian country to live in peace next to Israel, you simply want to wish away Israel? That is your moral solution?

You know, deep down, that Israel will never let that happen. Right? Or, maybe you don't? Hard to tell.

But if this is how many in the world view the situation, and this is the solution many in the world are working towards, then I guess it's nuclear war. You get that, right? If Iran's proxies, Hamas and Hezbollah, continue to prevent peaceful coexistence, then Israel will continue to ratchet up the aggression until they start directly attacking Iran. Then it is The US, Europe and Saudi Arabia attacking Iran. Then it is Russia and China defending Iran. Then nukes will fly. But I guess this is the only sensible, moral solution you can come up with. Gotcha.


Out of curiosity, do you think Israel should EVER have been allowed to exist? I mean, that is the real question. I have to assume no, but maybe I do not fully understand how you think.



PS: Apartheid is a policy that is founded on the idea of separating people based on racial or ethnic criteria. You do realize that Israeli Arab population is about 2 million people, or about 20% of Israel's total population. The majority of these Arab citizens identify themselves as Arab or Palestinian by nationality and as Israeli by citizenship. You also realize that both Israeli Jews and Arabs are semites, and therefore are of similar ethnicity? Misuse of words like Apartheid and Genocide complicate any hope of coming to an understanding of the conflict. But I guess hiding behind such powerful words, even though used incorrectly, allows one to feel morally superior.

how would you feel if US citizens got killed because of the mistakes and evilness of our government?