Skip to main content

View Diary: Lebanon: George Galloway (UK MP) savages a Sky News interviewer (33 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Apparently (0+ / 0-)

    they've been holding prisoners for swapping for years. This is how they do things. I think I've posted those quotes for you several times, about Israel having the policy of holding Lebanese prisoners for no reason other than to trade. So yeah, by Israel's own standard, this was wholly reasonable.

    You cannot depend upon American institutions to function without pressure. --MLK Jr.

    by Opakapaka on Mon Aug 14, 2006 at 09:24:05 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Holding prisoners (0+ / 0-)

      for no other reason than a future trade? As in they were kidnapped and stored for future use as bargaining chips? I'd like to see that link.

      So yeah, by Israel's own standard, this was wholly reasonable.

      And therein lies the moral turpitude behind the apologia for Hizb'allah.

      W's First Veto: not for tax cuts for the rich, pork barrel spending and earmarks, or civil liberties violations, but for stem cell research.

      by Red Sox on Mon Aug 14, 2006 at 09:27:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  aoeu (0+ / 0-)

        Read the two blockquotes in this comment. Links are provided there, read the full articles for more info.

        You cannot depend upon American institutions to function without pressure. --MLK Jr.

        by Opakapaka on Mon Aug 14, 2006 at 10:16:20 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  OK, I see the disconnect (0+ / 0-)

          First, thanks for providing those links.

          Second, there is a difference between taking hostages to gain a return of someone and taking hostages just for a future trade. That may not have been what you were seeking to communicate, but that's what I read in "[a]pparently they've been holding prisoners for swapping for years." Those prisoners were held for the return of downed airmen and other hostages/prisoners of war, not some future swap for soldiers-to-be-kidnapped-later.

          That's not to excuse the practice--Israel is in the wrong for doing so, and it appears their Supreme Court said just that in one of the links you provided, ruling that at least one of the prisoners be released in the absence of a charge. But if Hizb'allah had returned airman Ron Arad or his remains, one can only imagine that they would have gotten most prisoners returned. Instead they escalated the conflict by incurring into Israel, killing and kidnapping people.

          W's First Veto: not for tax cuts for the rich, pork barrel spending and earmarks, or civil liberties violations, but for stem cell research.

          by Red Sox on Mon Aug 14, 2006 at 10:57:12 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Sure. If Hez (0+ / 0-)

            had given in. Why didn't Israel give in first? See, both sides are playing the same game. Then Israel gets sick of the game and starts a huge aerial bombardment campaign.

            You cannot depend upon American institutions to function without pressure. --MLK Jr.

            by Opakapaka on Mon Aug 14, 2006 at 11:16:33 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (122)
  • Community (57)
  • Memorial Day (31)
  • Culture (23)
  • Environment (20)
  • Rescued (20)
  • Law (20)
  • Civil Rights (20)
  • Science (18)
  • Marriage Equality (16)
  • Media (16)
  • Labor (16)
  • Elections (15)
  • Education (15)
  • Economy (14)
  • Republicans (14)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (14)
  • Ireland (14)
  • Josh Duggar (13)
  • Racism (12)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site