Tom Grey, I can think of only one possible solution to our never-ending struggle of Good Versus Stupid (you're stupid, I'm good, natch):

You must surrender.

I hereby demand your surrender. Think about it: if you surrender, you won't have to smoke as much crack to come up with your insane theories. You won't have to put up with all the potty mouth you receive as a result of your insane theories. I won't get so aggravated knowing there is such stupidity out there in the world. It's the only way: you must surrender.

Come on! The faster you surrender, the sooner we'll be best friends! If it worked for the Nazis, then it's guaranteed to work for you.

Oh wait, I forgot: besides the fact that surrendering means that you lose, the people you listed who surrendered didn't do so well for themselves. Napolean? Died on a frigid south Atlantic islet. Nazis? Hung and Nurenburg. Japanese? Hung for their warcrimes as well.

So what do we conclude from this? Well, we conclude that people don't like to surrender. Hezbollah will only surrender if they believe that continuing to fight is a worse option than being hung by the neck until dead. Israel certainly hasn't gotten to that point yet, so what in the fuck good is it to constantly talk about surrender qua policy option as if a) surrender were just another option to consider, on par with, say, winning or negotiating or planting daisies, and b) that all we have to do is say "surrender!" and Hezbollah will say "ok!"?

This line of thinking really represents how much you have abrogated any sense of responsibility to reality: it's far more important, in your mind, that Israel say "surrender!" than it is for Israel to create conditions that would force Hezbollah to surrender. Talk over action, ideology over reality, that's really the defining aspect of the modern conservative movement, isn't it?

Talk over action, ideology over reality, that's really the defining aspect of the modern conservative movement, isn't it?

This has to be about the most projection I've seen in a long while. Bush is taking action in Iraq (Yeah! yechh; MUCH harder than expected), Israel is taking action now.

The "talk over action" is talk about a ceasefire -- when it's clear such a ceasefire means Israel stops shooting but Hezbollah just pauses.

It's the Dem Party in the US; it's the UN, the EU. Talk (is cheap), but no enforcement of agreements.

I guess that's one of the better troll moves -- take the weakness of your side and claim the other side has it.

The weakness I DO have is a lack of humor; I'm just not good at insulting folk, even when what they say or write is so obviously silly.

Tom, your comeback, in as many words, was "I know you are, but what am I?"

Oooh, snap! Krazy's got my back, word!

Tom, what you are doing is advocating a fantasy. You have no concept of reality. "You know what would end this war?" you ask. "If one side surrendered!"

Brilliant, Tom! Did you work on that all night? You know what else would end this war? If one side won! Or if both sides agreed that fighting was bad and stopped! Or if candy rained from the sky!

There is no point in saying "the war will end if one side surrenders." This is called stating the painfully, uselessly obvious.

Beyond this, you assert that Israel should be calling on Hezbollah to surrender. Um, if Israel isn't already doing this, isn't that implied in the act of violence? What the fuck do you think Israel is saying to Hezbollah? "We will fight you until you wear clown makeup!" "We will fight you until you dance pretty dances!" Or could it be, just maybe, something like "We will fight you until you bend to our will"?

What you are asserting is "If X says Y, everything will be ok." No, Tom, this is a war. The result will be surrender if Israel has the means and desire to force Hezbollah to surrender. Repeat after me: Hezbollah will not surrender just because Israel says "surrender!"

You live in a fantasy land, Tom, in which words ("surrender!") are more powerful than ground troops. Either you are really stupid, and think that all Israel needs to do is shout really loudly at Hezbollah, or you're rigidly ideological and place your ideological constructs over physical reality.

You live in a dreamland, Tom. It doesn't matter whether Israel says "surrender!" or whether it says "tomato!" The result will depend on the facts on the ground, not on words.

Krazy, I'm sincerely disappointed in you.
Leetle troll's assertion is this:
For group C, of which I'm a member,
talk instead of action.

My assertion, group L, the main alternative to K, supports talk instead of action.

I support:
action to eliminate Taliban.
action for regime change in Iraq.
action to force Hezbollah to surrender.

The L folk:
a few against Taliban action.
many, maybe most, against regime change action.
many against forcing Hez surrender.

Which group supports action versus talk? The C group.


Your critique seems to be: I want to criticize you, so don't confuse me with facts.

On the issue of action vs. talk, why not argue for what you believe is the right path, towards the end you support?

I support a border with no rockets.

Wow Tom !
I hope that al of your commenters are not as nasty as the ones preceding me! They have to be some of the worst examples of "I don't want to hear what you have to say,so just shut up!" That isn't discussion,just cussin'!

But on to the topic of your post.

Unfortunately you are correct. A "ceasefire" is not enough, they have done nothing in the past, and there is no reason to expect any different results now.

Hezebollah and probably Lebanon will have to be brought to the point that there is unconditional surrender. Sad,but true.

Anything else is a sham,and nothing will be changed for the better.

I've just deleted the prior leetle troll potty mouth critique, including the chickenhawk accusation.
"you're a hypocrite if you support action without doing it, yourself."

A silly argument that sounds good to teenagers.