Do you think these conditions the Hezabollah have issued are fair?

Question

Considering Israel has the upper hand and Hezabollah started this.

The Lebanese government has now adopted four Hezbollah conditions for a settlement as its own: giving the small disputed slice of border territory known as Shabaa Farms to Lebanon, returning three Lebanese prisoners held by Israel, ending Israeli flyovers into Lebanese airspace, and providing a map showing the location of Israeli land mines in southern Lebanon.

The issue of Shabaa Farms has been the public rationale for allowing Hezbollah, alone among civil war-era militias, to keep its weapons. It was, Lebanese officials have said, resisting continued Israeli occupation.

I found this on nytimes.com

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/26/world/middleeast/26mideast.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1

Its true that Hezbollah remains a threat and if its true the Israeli soldiers were returned how about the ones that died and the history of people that died from Hezabollah attacks.

I don't think a border dispute should be settled this way. It seems like Lebanon is asking for something they know Israel won't give or a reward for their successful ruse to start a war and benefit.

Answer 1

Great question.

Personally, I tend towards a belief in unconditional surrender on the part of the aggressor, but at least this seems like progress to me.

Here are my immediate problems with it:

1) Shabaa Farms - Who has the better claim, why was it in Israel, how long has it been there, how many people would lose their homes over this, and -most of all- since when does the winning side cede land to the losing side? Also, will Hezbollah disarm if this is ceded?

2) Three Prisoners Released - Who are these three? Why are they in prison in the first place? Will the Lebanese then produce the soldiers they have kidnapped?

3) Lebanese airspace - what are the borders of this airspace? Will the Lebanese allow an international force to have flyovers instead (to confirm continued disarmament of Hezbollah)?

4) Why are these mines present? What other defenses for the border will be available? What is the practicality of those defenses?

So, I guess I don't see those conditions as fair, but at least it seems like things are getting a bit more reasonable. Still, from my point of view, the aggressor in this conflict is Hezbollah, which means they don't get to set terms. I would like to hear from the Israelis what their terms are.

Answer 2

none of those things will happen if Hezbollah remains an armed power. Until they are replaced, or disarmed, and Israel has her kidnapped guys back, the rest of what you say means nothing. I do think though that those are the types of things that need to be discussed after the terror group Hezbollah is gone, and the soldiers returned. You dont give in to an aggressors demands, and Hezbollah has certainly been the aggressor here.

Answer 3

All Israel wanted was that Lebanese police it self. Dis harm a group that wants to kill Jews. The farms are not a concern to Israel only the guns and missiles. They still state they want the lebanese army to take over the south.

Answer 4

Yes. However, HezBULLie must agree to the following:

1. Stand out in a field far away from civilian populations.
2. Place all weapons in a big pile in the middle of the field.
3. Get REAL close to the pile.
4. Set fire to the pile.
5. Bend over and .................
6. Enjoy virgins.

May it be Allah's will.

Answer 5

You do realize that if the Hezbollah had jsut given back the Iraeli soldiers they kidnapped...this would be over right? That is all they would ahve to do now....more or less....and this war would stop.....it is not for them to make demands...they are on the run

Answer 6

Since when do civilized people negotiate with terrorists murderers? Hezbollah is not Lebanon who are they to demand anything