An Ominous Choice Of Words

Update: Hezbollah headquarters in southern Beirut reported destroyed.

Update: Yes, evidently you can send pizza to the IDF. I've been monitoring much news when I can and Pajamas Media is doing a stand out job with updates. Of particular interest in my reading around was an acknowledgment that during a phone call, President Bush pledged to the Lebanese President to encourage Israel to limit destruction in Lebanon; however, he stopped short of agreeing to call for a cease fire. Telling note. Hugh Hewitt at the new Townhall.com also has some interesting links I haven't seen elsewhere.

Update: Syria to Hezbollah - stop attacks. Latest headlines from the JP here. Typical move, they want to survive. Israel should continue the operation. Obviously they're being effective and Hezbollah has to go if there's ever going to be peace.

Arab papers are carrying Saudi Arabia's condemnation of Hezbollah. That hasn't stopped the UN and EU capitals from denouncing Israel. Go figure. But Australian Canadian* PM Stephen Harper isn't having any of it:

Harper, who is in London for a two-day visit, called Israel's response to the kidnapping of three soldiers "measured" and "simply self-defence".

Israel's ambassador to the United States has warned Syria and Iran they are "playing with fire." I would imagine that's something of a reminder of Israel's options to Iran, who has been offering up heated rhetoric of its own.

Israel's ambassador to Washington said yesterday that Iran and Syria are "playing with fire" and "will bear the consequences" if Hezbollah transfers two kidnapped Israeli soldiers to either of its patron nations.

Ambassador Daniel Ayalon did not rule out retaliatory strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities, though other Israeli officials said that was not being planned.

And the Washington Post, of all papers, has published a piece by Michael Oren, a military historian and senior fellow at the Shalem Center, in Jerusalem, calling for Israel to confront Syria and Iran. His piece does fit in with what Israel has called altering the dynamics significantly; however, Oren is not speaking for the government.

Today a united Hezbollah-Hamas axis has emerged, financed and trained by Syria and Iran, with the goal of destabilizing Israel and frustrating its efforts to disengage from the conflict. In spite of the perils that this front poses to Israel, and the ethical dilemmas that fighting it raises, Israel can transform the situation into one that promotes both domestic and regional stability.

At WorldNet Daily, Lebanon's Druze leader Walid Jumblatt is suggesting Iran and Syria ordered the attacks.

The Jerusalem Post reports a Palestinian has been killed by a tank round. They also report on some overnight fighting:

Overnight Thursday, the IAF struck an office in the Gaza Strip that was used by a Hamas official. Palestinian sources reported that one person was wounded in the attack.

Earlier Thursday night, Palestinians threw a bomb at an IDF patrol near Jenin. None of the soldiers were wounded, but the vehicle was damaged.

Also, three Kassam rockets landed in Sderot on Friday and the latest casualty report from the JP is in the last two graphs.

Givati Brigade forces and IDF tanks, which were operating in the central Gaza Strip, left the area on Friday morning after neutralizing over 30 Palestinian terrorists in the last three days.

An IDF spokesperson stressed that operations in the Strip would continue "in the same format."

Three people were killed and 55 wounded in overnight IAF air strikes against the Lebanese capital's southern suburbs where Hizbullah has its strongholds, police said Friday.

The casualties brought to 50 the number of Lebanese killed by the IDF since Wednesday, when Israel attacked Lebanon to rescue two of its soldiers captured by Hizbullah guerrilla.

Check in for on going developments: Blogs of War     Hot Air   and  Pajamas Media, which has a late report - a statement out of Jordan calling for Israel to step back.

Also check out the art at All Things Beautiful

* Well, he sounded like an Australian!

Comments

[Chris[topher] Chittleborough]

The events themselves are scary enough, but the reactions from Saudi Arabia, Egypt etc seem to indicate that this *may* be only the start of something bigger. (BTW, Stephen Harper is from Canada.)

[anonymous]

I do believe that Stephen Harper is Canada's Prime Minister.John Howard is Australia's PM.

[Dan]

Yeah, my mistake - thanks

[splashtc]

Who doubts the home grown anti bush, anti war, ala sheehan et al /nytimes...doesn't empower and embolden the anti west/terrorists. Stupid self hating libs. As we-the civilized people- wait for deplomacy the enemy continues to plot and carry out their plans.

[Neantaeus]

I wonder if it would not be a "good" thing if Israel lobs a few into Syria and draws Iran directly into the fight. Such an action might then present an opportunity for someone to move against Iran's nuclear facilities once the Iranians retailiate -as they have threatened to do. I'm not advocating such an action (and even if I was, nobody that I am, it would not matter) but it is an interesting, if cold-hearted and inflamatory, propositon.

[rwilymz]

from cnn.com:
"Israeli military sources say they believe the longer-range missiles fired yesterday at Haifa, Israel, were made in Iran."

YEEhah! Buckle up, folks

[rwilymz]

Next from cnn.com:
"Witnesses say a flood of people are crossing into Gaza from Egypt after Palestinians blew a hole in a border wall at the Gaza-Egypt border, The Associated Press reports."

So the actual civilians are leaving Gaza. The remaining 10 year old are bomb runners, the remaining pregnant women are bomb assemblers, and the remaining teenagers are bomb detonators.

Flatten it.

[xxx]

Hezbollah has been a power in Lebanon for many years, and um, being that they are absolute fanatics and that Hezbollah stayed in Lebanon after Irael finally disengaged it seems highly unlikely they are going to be defeated...of course if Israel just decides to mass bomb the entire country and kill everyone, that might defeat them.

Hmmm, slaughter of an entire civilian population, does that come under the heading of 'pre-emptive war'?

Every country on the planet EXCEPT the United States has condemmed Israel for invading Lebanon and called it a grossly disproportionate response that needlessly excalated the situation.

But if you dumbasses still think anyone is going to invade Iran, let alone the U.S., have at it.

I suppose now that we have liberated Iraq into a full scale civil war, with tens of thousands of civilians dead over the last three years, that it might be just about time for us to leave Iraq and go and totally destabilize another Arab country in our idiotic and misguided belief that democracy can be installed over night.

[rwilymz]

"slaughter of an entire civilian population"

Are you suggesting that 10 year olds who run explosives from the men who cook it to the women who sew it into bomb vests are "civilians"?

Are you suggesting that the women who make the vests and have fittings for the teenagers who wear them are "civilians"?

Are you suggesting that the teenagers who wear the vests to the Tel Aviv bar mitzvah they aren't invited to and kill the guest of honor are "civilians"?

Why? just cuz they aren't in uniform?

"if you dumbasses still think anyone is going to invade Iran, let alone the U.S., have at it"

It would more likely be the other way around. Syria and Iran have a mutual defense pact; if Israel goes after the [closest] source of the Hamas and Hezbollah supply line, Iran has pledged to rush to Syria's aid.

Iran is currently flanked by the US -- and don't think Iran isn't painfully aware of that.

With two more terrorist financiers out of business, where will the ad hoc paramilitaries get the money that allows the poorest people on the planet to buy some of the most expensive hand-held weapons made? Without money, they're nothing but a few million pissed-off hotheads with pointy sticks.

They might actually have to get a job.

And wouldn't that be a shame.

[Dan]

Every country on the planet EXCEPT the United States has condemmed Israel for invading Lebanon and called it a grossly disproportionate response that needlessly excalated the situation.

Go live in some city with the constant threat of rocket attacks and terrorism, then run your mouth. You people are unbelievable. It's teh very same mentality that allowed the Third Reich to come to be. You should be ashamed - you are a moral coward.

[raindrops]

if the saudis and the jordanians will stay back (as they seem inclined to want to do for the time being) and let the israelis do their work, they could free lebanon from hezbollah's and syria's influence (which is what a lot of lebanese people want anyway)and kick iran's ass in the process - we can hope

but splashtc i take exception to your stupid, self hating lib comment - i am liberal about a lot of things, but i sure don't hate myself or my country - and i'm not deranged or demented ala that frisch wacko - we may agree or disagree on a topic, but it doesn't make us stupid - on this topic i think the israelis need to kick butt, but it doesn't mean i suddenly got smart

[rwilymz]

on cnn.com:
"Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah says his group is ready for "open war" with Israel, news agencies report."

Must mean the supply plane from Iran just landed with more rockets.

[Dan]

"Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah says his group is ready for "open war" with Israel

That's kinda like saying bring it on in the third round of a prize fight after you've been getting your ass kicked around the ring in the first two rounds. Unfortunately, next we may see hostage taking and other terrorist activity. Dig in, this may be a long row to hoe.

[zzz]

xxx says: "I suppose now that we have liberated Iraq into a full scale civil war, with tens of thousands of civilians dead over the last three years, that it might be just about time for us to leave Iraq"

*Maybe so. That way we would be saving yet more hundreds of thousands of lives each year (compare pre-liberation avg yearly death toll from Saddam with post-liberation deaths). But I thought you lefties were in favor of international social work? Or are you only in favor of it if it is ineffective?

xxx says: "and go and totally destabilize another Arab country in our idiotic and misguided belief that democracy can be installed over night."

* Well, you may be right. We may not be able to stabilize Arab countries but it is our moral duty to at least try. The other alternative (stablization of the deserts via massive, distributed nuclear release) would seem to be a bit harsh if we don't try the other possibilities first.

[Herschel Smith]

Dan, I have a commentary up on the Iran connection and Iran war plans.

/2006/07/14/the-iran-war-plans/

[xxx]

Dan,

Why don't you try living in the Palestinian territories, where you live in daily threat of having your home bulldozed, your family killed "accidentally" by Israeli troops, not being able to get water because the Israeli's still control all the infrastructure, not being able to get medical help, including, say, going to the doctor to have your baby without being shot and killed and then talk about moral cowardize.

Israel, for those who actually bother to read and understand the situation, lost the moral high ground long ago. Of course, civilian casualties are to be deplored on all sides, but as the old saying goes if you beat a dog long enough it's going to bite you.

Israel is reaping and will reap the violence that it has sown and continues to sow until it agrees to a two state solution that actually allows for the Palestinians to have a territory free of jewish settlements and that is not configured to ensure they don't control infrastructure and access to water, etc...which was the sticking point with the original Oslo accord and why Arafat rejected it.

Israel, just like George Bush wants to separate the world into two categories, those that deseve liberty and the common human rights that the civilized world long ago agreed upon and those that fall into the "other" category and can be tortured and killed at will. And just like Bush, Israel reserves the right to decide exactly who is deserving of being treated like a human being and who isn't...not a judge, not a jury, not a legislature, no record, no trial, no evidence is needed....if they say you are a terrorist then you are, and its okay to deprive you of any rights they see fit.

Israel is destroying itself from the inside, because, as we will find out down the road, once you give up the moral high ground and decide whatever it takes is okay....dead kids, raped children, innocent people left homeless....then you are no better than your enemy.

[rwilymz]

"Why don't you try living in the Palestinian territories, where you live in daily threat of having your home bulldozed, your family killed "accidentally" by Israeli troops..."

Sounds rough. Glad I don't live there.

Makes you wonder why these people started so many wars against Israel before they had their own ducks in a row, doesn't it?

[Dan]

Why don't you try living in the Palestinian territories

Sure, let's go back to 1947. They could of had a fine country on the Sea by now if they weren't dominated by Jew hating terrorists.

On 29 November 1947, the United Nations General Assembly passed the United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine (United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181), a plan to resolve the Arab-Jewish conflict by partitioning the territory into separate Jewish and Arab states, with the Greater Jerusalem area (encompassing Bethlehem) coming under international control. Jewish leaders (including the Jewish Agency), accepted the plan, while Palestinian Arab leaders rejected it. Neighboring Arab and Muslim states also rejected the partition plan. As armed skirmishes between Arab and Jewish paramilitary forces in Palestine continued, the British mandate ended on May 15, 1948, the establishment of the State of Israel having been proclaimed the day before (see Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel). The neighboring Arab states immediately attacked Israel following its declaration of independence, and the 1948 Arab-Israeli War ensued. Consequently, the partition plan was never implemented.

[xxx]

I doubt there are very many groups that would roll over peacefully when half of their land was taken away from them and given over to another group, a group by the way that was comprised mostly of European jews who hadn't lived in Palestine/Judea/Israel for CENTURIES.

Now, it begs the question what were the U.S. and the UN thinking when they implemented this dumbass plan in the fist place? Did they expect the Palestinians to go quietly from their ancestral homes and farms? Did they think the Arabs would beat the Jews, and they could all say, hey, we tried to help them out? I have no idea, but I do know that the implementation of the 1947 plan was guaranteed to fail, and it did.

But, hows about we go back to pre-1947 and we look at how many Jews there were living in "Israel" at the time vs. how many Arabs were there.

That might be a better starting point to understand the Palestinian rage, or you could look at the 1947 parallel state solution as just another form of "empire" handed down by the Europeans on the third world, just like the rest of the arbitrary divisions made in the Middle East and Africa without regard to tribes, historic cultural continueity or anything else...and again, we, and they, are still living with the consequences of those decisions, decades later.

I don't think Israel pulled out of Gaza in good faith, they aren't quite as dumb about intelligence as we are and I suspect they knew full well that Hamas was going to win the election and that would give them just the leverage they needed and wanted to squeeze the Palestinians until something popped, thus, giving them the excuse for more military actions designed to destroy the Palestinian people.

In my opinion.

[zzz]

"That might be a better starting point to understand the Palestinian rage"...

Palestinian rage is no different from the rest of Muslim rage: existential fury that they do not live in the Allah-promised position of domination of all dhimmis.

[xxx]

An interesting question might be, what happened to the Arabs? They went from being more advance scientifically and culturally than Europe in the early centuries--jews actually faired better in Arab countries than in Christian ones in those days....to what we see today...mostly backward, oppressive countries suffused with religious extremism...

I've never seen a good explanation of how the culture devolved to such an extent.

I disagree about the Palestinians though, they have many, many legitimate reasons to hate and despise their treatment by Israel.

[Skyboxx]

Escaltion is quick on this one.....And you can't write this stuff. Now Iranian leader is almost taunting the Israeli's into battle.

As they say at the amusement parks, "Please hold on to the bar"

This isn't amusing, but if one did not know better, one could see that Iran is about to get a major boot up its behind. Israel will take Lebanon, and Iran and then Syria (which is in the middle) will say enough and a cease fire.

Everyone wants Iran softened up so we can commence with a pipeline from the Caspian Sean (Next largest untapped oil reserves) to the gulf.

[Skyboxx]

Dan,

The Baldour doctrine (1948) from which you speak was not the elan of the conflict, nay the conflict has been going on for centuries. The Baldour doctrine was a defining moment, as up until then ISRAEL was not recognized as a state.

People need to read history and see that a good part of what is modern day Jordon is actually Palestine. But the Jordanians are crazy about having the Palistinians (and those who are war mongers) in their back yard either.

Since 1948, nearly every Arab country in the vicinity has waged war with Israel and LOST. Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Jordon, etc.

Also, check out the spin back then and check out the spin now. Did you know that Menachem Begin was once a "WANTED MAN" by the British Authorities. He was considered a terrorist back then. Of course he was considered a saint for his participation as PM in the Camp David Accords.

History is a tricky thing now a days and not just for bloggers to make up.

[Skyboxx]

Dan,

The Baldour doctrine (1948) from which you speak was not the elan of the conflict, nay the conflict has been going on for centuries. The Baldour doctrine was a defining moment, as up until then ISRAEL was not recognized as a state.

People need to read history and see that a good part of what is modern day Jordon is actually Palestine. But the Jordanians are not crazy about having the Palistinians (and those who are war mongers) in their back yard either.

Since 1948, nearly every Arab country in the vicinity has waged war with Israel and LOST. Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Jordon, etc.

Also, check out the spin back then and check out the spin now. Did you know that Menachem Begin was once a "WANTED MAN" by the British Authorities. He was considered a terrorist back then. Of course he was considered a saint for his participation as PM in the Camp David Accords.

History is a tricky thing now a days and not just for bloggers to make up.

[zzz]

I am far from an expert on what happened to Arab Muslim culture (tho have read a few books about/touching on it).

That said... my view is that they profited immensely from their Jihad-based conquering ways from the 8th century onward for a good long time. Amazing how a string of plundered countries (mostly formerly-rich Byzantine territories) can boost the knowledge, wealth, and sophistication of a poor desert tribe.

When the West finally began to effectively fight back (at Tours in what later became France first, then Spanish Reconquista, then later in Eastern Europe), the flow of fresh loot stopped, and the wealth and power of the Caliphate (actually by then, several distinct Muslim factions) began to decline.

In a roughly parallel timeframe, Europe was slowly discovering the scientific method, the Enlightenment, and all the rest of what became the base of the technological leap forward that the West experienced.

Meanwhile, with the loot stopped and "Allah's" words in the Koran having foreclosed free investigation, thought and action (hence preventing their own scientific revolution or Enlightenment), Muslim and Arab knowledge, wealth, and sophistication fell precipitiously.

Only way out for them now is to to reject the boundaries that "Allah" put in the Koran, which clearly is one of the things that the Wahabbis live to prevent.

Failing that, destroy the West so they won't have to see their failures in our mirror.

[xxx]

Hmm,

I don't know about that, all ancient cultures pretty much looted and wage war against their neighbors, and it was Europe that launched the crusades to take back the "holy city" so you can't blame the Arabs for that...the Persian Empire had a lot more going on than foreign booty.

However, I do wonder if the rise of Islam and some of the tenants didn't play a part in the disintegration of Arab culture and centers of learning, but I don't know enough about the Koran to really say..seems about as doubful whether Muhammed would have approved of the modern Arab state as whether Jesus Christ would have approved of the many turns that Christianity has taken.

Please to remember that a lot of what we know of the classical world came from Arab sources...the Christians having destroyed many of their own records as being Pagan.

[Dan]

disagree about the Palestinians though, they have many, many legitimate reasons to hate and despise their treatment by Israel.

Their treatment by Israel? How about their treatment by other Arab states, who don't want them, either. In egypt they live in camps, just as most other places.

[xxx]

Their treatment by Israel? How about their treatment by other Arab states, who don't want them, either. In egypt they live in camps, just as most other places.
------------

The salient point remains, they would be in "Palestine" if it wasn't for the creation of Israel, which they had nothing to do with, so any other harm that has been done to them by the other Arab states allowing them to live in poverty and degradation to give themselves a popular "cause" to support that takes away from their own repressive actions against their own Arab populations is still secondary.

The House of Saud is corrupt through and through...but Arab wrongs do not eraise Israeli wrongs, just like saying "but they beheaded our soldiers" isnt' an excuse for any atrocities committed by our soldiers, "we aren't as bad as them" is a pathetic rationale, especially coming from Americans.

[zzz]

all ancient cultures pretty much looted and wage war against their neighbors.

* yup. The Jihadis were just particularly effective, and systemic.

and it was Europe that launched the crusades to take back the "holy city" so you can't blame the Arabs for that...

* key point: "take back". The MidEast was originally Christian/Byzantine, conquered by Islam. Crusades were a belated - and ultimately ineffective - defensive reaction. Anyway, that's a side point to my original point -- not who was to blame but that over a very long time, the lack of new conquests impoverished Arab/Muslim culture.

the Persian Empire had a lot more going on than foreign booty.

* By then, the Persian Empire (Sassanid, or Second Persion Empire) was in decline, and the Islamic Caliphate finished them off.

However, I do wonder if the rise of Islam and some of the tenants didn't play a part in the disintegration of Arab culture and centers of learning, but I don't know enough about the Koran to really say..seems about as doubful whether Muhammed would have approved of the modern Arab state as whether Jesus Christ would have approved of the many turns that Christianity has taken.

Please to remember that a lot of what we know of the classical world came from Arab sources...the Christians having destroyed many of their own records as being Pagan.

* True that some of what we know is from recopied Islamic sources, however AFAIK most classics knownn today were retained in original Greek (and Latin, of course). So those were almost certainly not sourced from Islamic translations but copied and recopied endlessly through the Middle Ages by (often) Catholic scribes (prototypically, Monks).

From my reading, the biggest loss of knowledge for the classical world came from the destruction of the Library of Alexandria, about which circumstance the historic record seems truly muddled.

[Dan]

they would be in "Palestine"

There never was a state called Palestine, anymore than there was an Israel. And the battle isn't even over land for heaven's sake. That's a crock. It's about one religion which won't accept, or live in peace with another.

[xxx]

There never was a state called Palestine, anymore than there was an Israel. And the battle isn't even over land for heaven's sake. That's a crock. It's about one religion which won't accept, or live in peace with another.
______________

That is pure crap. It is a fact that jews were historically better treated by Arab nations than Christian ones, they didn't have Christ killer pogroms in the Middle East.

This is ALL about land and nothing to do with religion, that is a smoke screen put up so that anyone and everyone who disagrees with Israel's policy is branded a jew hating anti-semite. It is bull shit that jews and Arabs have been locked in a religious war for eons.

ZZZZ...

I think you need to brush up on your history. The Middle East was never originally "Christian" and the crusades were launched not in retaliation for any Arab aggression but because it was an anathma to the West that the birthplace of christ be ruled by muslims...how could the crusades have been a "Defensive" reaction when the Middle East was populated by many muslims and arabs, few jews and fewer christians?

I think the library at Alexandria burned during Julius Caesar's occupation of Egypt...you know, one of those darn ole military accidents/collateral damage type of situations.

[Dan]

The Middle East was never originally "Christian"

I assume you're some Christian hating moron - and that holds if you are one, too. I never said the Middle east was Christian.

[xxx]

Well, Dan, I was actually responding to "zzz" who stated that the Middle East was 'orginally Christian Byzantine and was conquered by Islam"..hence the ZZZZ portion of my post, not directed at you but at "zzz"....

I forgot what a hack you are.

[Dan]

I forgot what a hack you are.

Well, my apologies for the misunderstanding. As for the rest of it - hack me off.

[raindrops]

Careful, Dan, you might get "frisched" by an angry debater who takes that "hack me off" comment too seriously. Blogging seems to have become a dangerous business these days. ;-)

[Skyboxx]

The USA has been in the conflict since the beginning our our nation some 230 years ago. Check you history when 'ole Tom Jefferson, 2nd president fretted on whether or not to mix it up with "Barbary Pirates" off the Afican Coast.

Who were these pirates? Answer some arab, (now muslim, I suppose) Jihadist..Check out the history books friends, don't take a bloggers word for it.

Dan, you hit on something, but didn't come out and say it. Are the hebrews/Israelis a nation or a religion?

Do you believe they have a right to sovereignty? If they do, so do all those in the Balkans states, and the tribe in Northern Iraq, and the nomads near turkey.

Lets not forget global colonization by the nations of Europe which have contributed to many of the modern day conflicts. Iraq, carved out and given an identity. Israel, the same thing. Vietnam, etc.

I can still remember British Honduras, today its call Belize.

The age old question, who owns what?

Some might say we took some land ourselves a bit aggresiously a while back.

Not for nothing, we need to settle down the hot heads, no matter whose side they are on, if for nothing else than to keep stability.

Finally, how much longer before a civilian ship is hit by a rocket or some other "incident" that brings other nations into this latest conflict.

Hot spots are never good.

[kate]

Amazing that 33 countries voted in favor of UN resolution 181, yet the UN has never protected Israel.

[Thanks]

Thank you Dan !
---------

Every country on the planet EXCEPT the United States has condemmed Israel for invading Lebanon and called it a grossly disproportionate response that needlessly excalated the situation.

Go live in some city with the constant threat of rocket attacks and terrorism, then run your mouth. You people are unbelievable. It's teh very same mentality that allowed the Third Reich to come to be. You should be ashamed - you are a moral coward.

Posted by: Dan | Friday, July 14, 2006 at 01:21 PM

they would be in "Palestine"

There never was a state called Palestine, anymore than there was an Israel. And the battle isn't even over land for heaven's sake. That's a crock. It's about one religion which won't accept, or live in peace with another.

Posted by: Dan | Friday, July 14, 2006 at 05:15 PM

The Middle East was never originally "Christian"

I assume you're some Christian hating moron - and that holds if you are one, too. I never said the Middle east was Christian.

Posted by: Dan | Friday, July 14, 2006 at 05:49 PM

I forgot what a hack you are.

Well, my apologies for the misunderstanding. As for the rest of it - hack me off.

Posted by: Dan | Friday, July 14, 2006 at 07:25 PM

[rwilymz]

"Now, it begs the question what were the U.S. and the UN thinking when they implemented this dumbass plan in the fist place?"

The US was not involved in the Balfour plan, Mister History.

You're thinking of the Brits. Easy to confuse us, and all, particularly with the "blame America first" blinders on.

"Did they expect the Palestinians to go quietly from their ancestral homes and farms?"

Nobody was pushing the pal-arabs anywhere. ... until they started a war.

"Did they think the Arabs would beat the Jews, and they could all say, hey, we tried to help them out?"

The Arabs thought they'd win, certainly. It was 6-1. With the Brits helping.

"I have no idea..."

The first honest statement you've made yet.

"But, hows about we go back to pre-1947 and we look at how many Jews there were living in "Israel" at the time vs. how many Arabs were there."

About half-n-half.

"I think you need to brush up on your history."

You must be talking to your mirror.

"The Middle East was never originally "Christian""

The Roman Empire, which controlled that portion of the middle east, essentially from ye olde Babylon to Carthage and all in between, on up north to Anatolia [turkey, dimwit] and Thrace, adopted Christianity as their official religion in the first few centuries AD. Then almost immediately split into the western Roman empire, ruled by Rome, and the eastern Byzantine empire, ruled by Byzantium, soon to be called Constantinople, and now known as Istanbul.

The Middle East was "officially" Christian with a whole passel of jews and zoroastrans running around.

...until the 600s when the zoroastrans converted en masse to islam.

"and the crusades were launched not in retaliation for any Arab aggression but because it was an anathma to the West that the birthplace of christ be ruled by muslims"

The converted Arab zoroastrans swept east and west conquering everything from central asia to north Africa, deftly leaving the more powerful Byzantine Empire alone. The moors [Maghreb arabs] then invaded Spain. The turks, in central asia, decided to repay the kindly Arab invasion, and invade right back, but they'd been converted to islam themselves, and the Seljuks slowly pushed the Christian Byzantines back out of the middle east and by 1076 had just about put them back at the gates of Constantinople.

"how could the crusades have been a "Defensive" reaction when the Middle East was populated by many muslims and arabs, few jews and fewer christians?"

Since europe was now being invaded by muslim empires from two sides -- and occassionally being raided in the south by african berbers -- the European monarchs decided that the thing to do was to hit back in the middle, so they implored the Pope to use his influence to call for a Crusade. The First Crusade was in 1099. This places it anywhere from 25 years to 250 years AFTER muslim empires started invading Europe.

Get yourself a calendar, Mister History, and learn how to use it.

The condition of history education in US schools is absolutely pathetic. "xxx" being a prime example.

[rwilymz]

"An interesting question might be, what happened to the Arabs? They went from being more advance scientifically and culturally than Europe in the early centuries--jews actually faired better in Arab countries than in Christian ones in those days....to what we see today...mostly backward, oppressive countries suffused with religious extremism..."

In the post-Roman vacuum of scientific, cultural and educational advancement, the Arabs were the odds-on favorite to take the mantel for themselves. Yes. Byzantium was powerful, but dumb and lazy. They were content to be the same in 800AD as they were in 300AD. They merely made things more bureaucratic and confused than better ... which is why the adjective "byzantine" means "overly complicated and pointless".

"I've never seen a good explanation of how the culture devolved to such an extent."

Mohammed happened.

Before Mohammed came along, Arabs were largely zoroastrans, and into science and commerce and engineering. They invented the zero for godsake, which even the Romans didn't have.

Then Mohammed came, started his tribal wars-infused-with-religious-fervor, built up a small little kingdom, then died. When he died, those who were related decided that the relatives needed to inherit the kingdom, and the non-relatives disagreed. That is where the Sunni/Shi'a schism came in. The Shi'a are descendants of Mohammed's clan.

Sunni-Shi'a conflicts? Not religious -- tribal. The Sunnis went around to all the rest of the Arabs and said "this tribe over there wants to rule over you, so join with us and stop them -- by the way, here's your new religion..." and that's how islam spread virtually overnight among the Arabs. ...and why virtually all Arabs are Sunni. The Shi'a are just those Arabs which had traditional enmities with the original Sunni tribes, and the Persians.

Traditional Islam teaches raging traditionalism: do not change ANYthing, for ANY reason, because anything new is unholy.

It was Islam itself that arrested the cultural development of the Middle East; they have not had their Reformation yet, nor their cultural Renaissance. The same, or pretty close to the same, could have been said about Christianity and Europe until about 500 years ago.

[Katje]

Thank you so much, rwilymz, for attempting to teach xxx a little bit of history. I'm afraid that his teflon inner head will not permit much of it to stick, though.

One of the points that you bring up is the concept of the Sunni-Shi'a conflict as a tribal one, not a religious one. That's something I've been trying to point out for years: that the Arab world still hasn't been able to move beyond their tribal mentality. Sure they have oil money, cars, computers and the other trappings of the modern world (including all the rhetoric), but deep down they still see themselves as members of one particular tribe or another. Islam, and the injunctions of the Qur'an reinforce this limiting and very short-sighted way of perceiving the world - thereby making it easier to come to the "they're all out to get us" conclusions that many Muslims seem to have reached.

And also, xxx (you reaper of scorn and derision), please do read your history book in detail, and not just the screeds from whichever so-called human rights group is exalting Palestine right now. What you will find is that your beloved Muslim occupiers did not treat the Jews under their occupation any better than did the Europeans at the time; they just had better apologists in later years. In addition to paying the "Jizya" or non-believers tax, they had to pay many other fines and fees as well, for the privilege of living under muslim benevolence. They were subjected to unfair (read: criminal) trade practices, and they were also at the mercy of whatever whims seized any muslim passing by. As non-believers, many were tortured and killed, many were robbed of their goods and livelihoods, many were taken off and sold into slavery in markets far away, and just as in Europe, they were the convenient source of blame when something went wrong.

But many European scholars went to the ME to study with/under muslim scholars, you may say. True enough, but that didn't last long. Many of the scholars who would consent to take on western scholars were Sufi's, a sect that is still considered illegal in many areas, not only because of its acceptance of Western contact, but of its scholarship, as well as the consideration that other religions and sects may hold an equal claim to God's wisdom. When the muslim world closed back in on itself, most of the scholarly advances that it had gathered from the countries under its dominion fell into blackness as knowledge and learning died away.

Okay, now xxx, turn on your brain: there is no such thing as an agreeable two-state solution for either side. Anybody with 2 brain cells to rub together could have figured that out by now. To the Arabs, the only possible acceptable outcome would be the complete withdrawal of all Jews, but they have to leave all their wealth, belongings, infrastructure, and well, maybe some people to handle all the public sanitation and whatnot. Well, that's really the second-best acceptable one; the absolute best would just be to annihilate all the Jews. What the Arabs do not want is a bunch of Palestinians looking around for a new home, like say, Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Saudi, Kuwait and the like. They like the Palestinians trained on Israel, to keep Israel in check, because they all know that Israel is the only true military power in the area. And as a working democracy and a successful country, they present an entirely different kind of threat as well.

As to the charges that Israeli soldiers are invading Gaza on a daily basis and torturing and killing children and women (would any of these by any chance be any of the ones making or wearing suicide belts, or launching home-made rockets, or maybe standing in positions that afford them a clear view to take potshots at Israeli children?) - my goodness. And I bet all the pamphlets showed women in abayas (usually of the crone-type variety) holding someone and wailing. I'm assuming here (based on your snotty statement above) that you have lived in a Palestinian settlement and have suffered inconvenience in not being able to get to hospital because Israeli engineers were bulldozing baby-water bottle-rocket-roads or whatnot. Please. Don't try to seize the moral highground from people who actually know what they're talking about and have been over there before. Otherwise, you're just another tool of some socialist propaganda machine. As they say, if you'll believe in everything, you'll fall for anything, oh, and by the way, I have a bridge in Lebanon I'd like to sell you...

[zzz]

Thanks for teaching xxx a little history, rwilymz. And yes, it is amazing what poor education in history the US settles for these days. I am sure it is satisfactory to the liberal educational establishment, however, as a poor understanding of what came before is helpful to misunderstanding what is happening now. And that is beneficial to the liberal agenda.

Re one point:

"The Middle East was "officially" Christian with a whole passel of jews and zoroastrans running around.

...until the 600s when the zoroastrans converted en masse to islam. "

I am sure you know (but did not say) that the reason the Zoroastrans "converted" is that the Persian Empire (Sassanids) were conquered by the Muslims starting with Caliph Umar ibn al-Khattāb at Ctesiphon in 637 and pretty well wrapped up at the Battle of Nihawānd. And after being conquered, the Persian Zoroastrians were given dhimmi status -- serf/slave-like, special taxes, little or no protection under the law, etc. As time went by, many converted out of self-protection. Of course, this is essentially what happened to the conquered Christians of the MidEast as well.

Later, the Muslim Caliphate continued to chip away at the rest of the MidEast (officially Christian and Byzantine, as you note), until finally the reigning power of world Christianity (Rome pretty much reduced to a poor sideshow by then), Constantinople itself, finally fell.

And that is pretty much how the imperialistic Muslim religion wiped out its neighbors, and took over the Christian MidEast (and Zoroastrian, MidEast more broadly viewed). And, as you indicated, it was the Western popes' (belated) recognition that Islam was destroying the Christian MidEast that led to the Crusades.

People who don't understand that the Crusades were a defensive reaction have so little understanding of the dynamics between Islam and the West that they should be embarrassed to comment on the current terrorist threats.

Just a sidenote, zzz, for some idea of how the Jihadis view this -- Osama has specifically cited the Spanish recovery of their own territory of Andalusia as one of the underlying reasons for his launching his jihad. In other words, Christian recovery of Christian lands conquered by Islam is deemed a great religious insult today. 500 Years after the Spanish finished recovering the stolen lands!

Learn *why* they are in conflict with us and citing 500 year old grievances against the West -- that may help you get a better handle on why Muslims are in conflict on every border they share with every other culture/religion.