A few days ago Israel threatened to set Lebanon “back 20 years” if the two captured Israeli soldiers weren’t returned. Looks like they’re making good.
The photo comes from the SF Chronicle – originally from Reuters. Casualties are starting to mount on both sides, though the Lebanese civilians are taking the worst of it.
In my view, Israel has to protect its soldiers. But tearing the whole country apart in retaliation seems a bit disproportionate. How was this bridge related to the captures? Well, according to some of the reports the Israelis are taking out all bridges that would enable Syrian support of Lebanese troops. I guess they’re anticipating a wider war.
“You wanted an open war and we are ready for an open war,” Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah said in a taped statement. He vowed to strike even deeper into Israel with rockets.
Meanwhile, I’ll be going home to my wife and kids tonight. We’ll be eating some spaghetti. I’ll probably play a game of Chutes and Ladders with my 4-year-old. After we get the kids asleep I’ll get on the stationary bike and watch something from Netflix. I may come online for a news update and some closing blog thoughts for the evening. I’ll walk my dog in the serene Redway air in the near full moon light. If it’s quiet enough I’ll be able to hear the Eel River as I walk down Redway Ave. I’ll then join my wife in bed without fear of aerial bombs, armed groups showing up at my door, or my child being killed at a nightclub by a suicide bomber of the same age. In my 40s I still wonder why I was fortunate enough to be born here and not there.
29 comments
Comments feed for this article
July 15, 2006 at 12:32 am
K2 GLOBAL COMMUNICATIONS
The Weekly Standard has a great post on this topic:
Israel’s “PR Problem The WorldwideStandard.com (Posted by Daniel McKivergan on July 14, 2006 09:31 AM )
The Washington Post’s David Ignatius informs us today that the U.S. and Israel have a “public opinion” problem. We’re further told that America needs to be an “honest broker” between Israel, a democracy, and the tyrant states and terrorist groups that surround it. But, as Charles Krauthammer writes in his excellent Post column today, Israel’s “PR” problem, in the eyes of many, begins with its very existence.
July 15, 2006 at 2:57 am
Anonymous
One reason I no longer consider myself an orthodox leftist is the obloquy heaped upon the Jewish state by those comfortably distant from Arab terrorism. One would have thought that 9/11 would awaken us from our complacence, but apparently, on the left, ideology trumps experience. Israel has more of a right to exist in the Mideast than we Europeans do here in California (stolen from two peoples, the native Americans and Mexico). I’m not returning to Europe soon, so why should Israel return to…. where would they go? And how many times lately have you heard the undisputed fact that the population of Jordan (quite a bit larger than Israel) is mainly Palestinian? Doesn’t this change the equation at least a bit? Remember this the next time you feel sorry for a people that has had several chances to create their own state, but seem to prefer wallowing in self-pity and living off handouts provided by the international community.
July 15, 2006 at 6:58 am
Anonymous
Eric:
Kiss your children and cherish every minute you spend with them in Redway. I spent many days at Dean Creek with my boys fishing and swimming. Do not let the politics of the rest of the world that is centuries old bring you down. We can only do so much.
July 15, 2006 at 7:38 am
Eric V. Kirk
K2 – The Weekly Standard, Will Kristol’s baby if I remember correctly, is certainly not the worst right wing periodical out there. But they do often miss the point, and I think they do here as well. Hezbollah may be headed up by psychos who would like to see Israel burned to the ground, but they’re going to benefit from this even if Lebanon suffers. The “second front” thing was an excuse to bait Israel, and it worked. Hezbollah will probably recoup some of that support they’ve been losing in 20 years of peace. Taking out the entire country’s infrastructure over the acts of a handful of militants might make some Israelis feel better in the short run, but it’s not going to get the soldiers back and it’s certainly not going to make Israel any safer.
I do have respect for Kristol however. He admitted a few years back that the whole “liberal media” line is strategic to “play the ref” for better coverage for right wing causes. That kind of honesty might actually hurt the cause, if anybody was paying attention.
anon 7:57 – I don’t think it’s that simple, but then I agree that some of the leftists try to oversimplify it even more. Jordan may be mainly Palestinian, however, the Palestinians in question have been living where they’re living for centuries. Most of the olive tree orchards that defined the economy on the West Bank have been destroyed by the Israelis over the years. It would be like somebody pushing us out of Humboldt County and saying “hey, there are more Americans in Redding. Why don’t you move there?” I do agree that the Palestinian leadership has blown some opportunities due to their extreme ideologies, and it is ridiculous that almost 60 years later they still can’t accept that Israel is there to stay (although I’ve always thought it would have been more equitable to chop off a third of Germany and establish the Jewish state there). However, any historian will tell you that the whole “land without a people for a people without a land” is pure B.S.
anon 11:58 – Yeah. I just hope those politics in particular never reach Redway. The KMUD stuff doesn’t seem so bad today.
July 15, 2006 at 4:53 pm
Carson Park Ranger
K2 Global should spend some time in Gaza. His pitiless support for Israeli violence might then change.
July 15, 2006 at 6:07 pm
Darth Versluys
You should argue why proportionalism is necessary in every situation before complaining that they broke it. Doesn’t a proportional response here seem like it would be weakness on the Israeli’s part?
Why is proportionalism a good idea?
July 15, 2006 at 7:29 pm
Carson Park Ranger
Killing Arab civilians is better than “looking weak”?
July 15, 2006 at 8:42 pm
Eric V. Kirk
Jim – I guess I sort of figured that proportionalism was a matter of common sense – especially the scale in question. Lebanon was starting to turn against Hezbollah, and Hezbollah was scrambling to look moderate to preserve what influence they had. In 24 hours, I’m sure it’s been all but reversed.
July 15, 2006 at 9:05 pm
Eric V. Kirk
Carson – you’re asking the wrong person. “Darth Versluys” doesn’t limit himself to anything remotely sensitive or “politically correct” in political discourse. If he can offend you or piss you off, so much the better. My advice? Don’t be offended. He’s a product of his environment.
In other words, I expect that his answer will be somewhere along the lines of “no problem.”
July 15, 2006 at 10:13 pm
Eric V. Kirk
From CNN: “The State Department estimates Hezbollah has “several thousand supporters and a few hundred terrorist operatives.”"
That’s disproportionate!
July 16, 2006 at 12:48 am
Darth Versluys
“Killing Arab civilians is better than ‘looking weak’?”
I’m asking what the strategic outcome of appearing to back down would be for the Isrealis. But, as I see you went from a general talk about a strong response into murdering civilians, I can already tell you’re not interested.
July 16, 2006 at 12:51 am
Darth Versluys
“Lebanon was starting to turn against Hezbollah, and Hezbollah was scrambling to look moderate to preserve what influence they had. In 24 hours, I’m sure it’s been all but reversed”
Spo then you’re theory is things would have turned out peachy if Israel sat and did nothing. Ok.
You win. I can’t crack stupidity that hard.
July 16, 2006 at 12:55 am
Anonymous
Of course the palestinians have been living there for centuries: why did they never create their own state, especially from 1948-1967, when there was no Israeli occupation to blame for their statelessness? Another question: if the Israelis were the dominant population in some other Mideast country, do you think that fact would go unmentioned by the world’s press? The fact that Jordan is majority_Palestinian is surely relevant to the power-struggle we are witnessing over there. The history of the world amounts to the migration of peoples (even Native Americans came from elsewhere, and there is a good deal of evidence that they displaced other peoples). I refuse to accept the constant lamentations of the Palestinians. They could have accepted the U.N. partition of 1947, and they could have set up their own state between 1948 and 1967. They chose not to, and their textbooks refused to admit the existence of Israel (according to the maps in the books). How many residents of Pakistan were displaced from their homes in India after WW2, homes they had lived in for centuries? Did they turn into suicide bombers, or did they decide to create a new life in their new country? Why is it simplistic to suggest that the Palestinians adopt the same path? And who really cares about those olive trees we hear so much about? There are many problems far more pressing – how about the 3.9 million people who have perished in the Congo in the last decade. That’s where the world’s attention should be focused, not on the suicidal antics of some Arabs who haven’t made peace with modernity.
July 16, 2006 at 7:21 am
Eric V. Kirk
Jim – I don’t know, call me stupid I guess. But it does seem like there are a number of options that lie somewhere between doing nothing and destroying all of the infrastructure that Lebanon has been building over the past couple of decades. Attacking the Hezbollah HG was probably appropriate. I don’t see much to be gained by the rest.
Basically a whole country is being torn apart for “several thousand supporters and a few hundred terrorist operatives.”
Hezbollah just played Israel like a fiddle.
anon 555 – You raise some general questions, mostly irrelevent to the rendering of Lebanon, but somewhat relevent to the general question of the Palestinian State and why the British didn’t allow them to declare themselves such. Some good questions with a few silly points until you reach this: “And who really cares about those olive trees we hear so much about?”
Well, let’s start with the families that had been tending those trees for centuries. Not just the orchards, the trees themselves which remain fruitful and healthy for hundreds of years.
As to why the conflict is so important? I chalk it up to the obsession with Biblical issues in three religions and the culture class of a sudden influx of Europeans following the war to a population that hadn’t done them any harm up to that point. The European hook in other words. They’re white. But as for your concern that Americans don’t care about Africans, I certainly share them.
July 23, 2006 at 1:57 am
Anonymous
haven’t read your ramblings for a week Eric …… you’re still just a wannabe hippie. What is it you do for a living ?
July 23, 2006 at 6:17 am
Eric V. Kirk
I’m an attorney. Wannabe hippie? Well, I do like nutritional yeast on my popcorn, but I can’t stand the smell of pachoolie. My hair’s been short since high school. I’ve never owned a VW, and I haven’t smoked anything of a mind altering nature in over 20 years. And I don’t own anything recorded by the Dead.
However, I do own most of the CCR albums. Does that count?
July 23, 2006 at 8:34 am
Anonymous
“nutritional yeast” ?? Never heard of that. Sounds yummy, but I prefer a tad bit of butter and maybe a little salt. Didn’t you just get back from a camping trip with “hippies” (your word) ????????
Even I have one Greatful Dead CD. And sad to say I have at least one CCR CD too. But then again I have some Barry Manilow, Glen Miller, and Jimmy Buffet.
an attorney ? What type of law do you practice ? What’s your specialty ? Do you have a specialty ? I don’t recall seeing your name in the paper (court … trials). How long have you been in Humboldt County ?
July 23, 2006 at 8:53 am
Anonymous
oh Eric. You don’t really have a grasp on Mid East history, politics, or current events. You should stick to issues like being the blogoshere cheerleader for Paul Gallegos.
What do you think about what happened last week at the DA’s office ??? Two more Deputy DA’s quit to go to DDA jobs in other counties!?! Gee wiz, what’s your spin on that ? Probably the same old party line abut cleaning house and all ? But one of the DDA’s was a PG hire, not from the previous regime (and her Dad was a big $$$ contributor to PG’s re-election). Good old PG, out in search of truth and justice (in Hawaii) while his office is falling into chaos and insignificance. Oh yeah, PG finally hired two DDA’s one week and then two quit the next week. Maybe “hugo” has some loser defense attorney buddies they could hire to really screw up the legal system in HC ??
so what do have to say in defense of your hero, the surfing DA ? Kowabunga dude !!
July 23, 2006 at 9:07 am
Eric V. Kirk
So why did the Gallegos hiree leave?
Isaac leaving is no shock to me, although it’s certainly a loss.
I have no spin. I expect that more people who were hoping for a Gallegos defeat, for good reasons or bad, will leave before this is through. Farmer also had a very large turnover when he first came to office. Bush’s turnover from Clinton’s administration was almost 100 percent.
More to the point of this thread, where am I deficient on MidEast history? Please educate me.
July 23, 2006 at 9:09 am
Anonymous
Oh I forgot! When things in HC really turn to shit don’t blame me. I voted for Worth ! Probably not a big surprise.
July 23, 2006 at 9:39 am
Eric V. Kirk
Don’t worry, I won’t blame you.
Is Gallegos responsible for this heat and my resulting insomnia?
July 23, 2006 at 4:34 pm
Anonymous
Eric, how can you compare the turnover in personnel from a two term Democratic President to a Republican President with a small county DA’s office election ? A pretty lame comparison.
Were you around when Farmer won in ’82? Or are you just repeating something from someone who heard something from someone ? I never heard your name back then. I do know Gallegos wasn’t around then(and neither was Salzman). As I recall there were a couple DDA’s that left after Farmer won, one of them told me they “couldn’t” work for someone with less experience than them (they didn’t like him personally). But at least Farmer had been a DDA, PG never has. However few DDA’s left when Farmer won cannot compare to what has happened under Gallegos. Just like Farmer, Gallegos won (at least the 1st election) because people wanted change. It wasn’t so much that Farmer won but DePoali lost. Depoali was a good trial attorney but a disaster as a DA (manager), he too was/became intoxicated with the power.
My point is that the number of Sr. (and Jr.) DDA’s fleeing the madness is going to continue. Gallegos will still collect his pay ($100k or so)from the county and still take several vacations a year, miss meetings/apointments, go surfing, and do “things” inconsistant with his position. In the not too distant future HC will truly be in dire straights, the downward spiral has already started and it cannot be stopped. Gallegos has gone out his way to destroy any positive relationship his office could have with local cops. Cops are in short supply all over California (and the US), not just my opinion but a fact — fact as police agencies all over are recruiting and they never seem to get up to full strength (someone who reads as much as you seem to should be aware of this too). Local cops are underpaid as it is, even if you think they don’t deserve higer pay there seem to be an abundant number of cities and counties that are willing to pay more and be supportive. Local cops have been, and continue, to leave although not at the rate of DDA’s.
Within a few months Jeffrey Swartz will be the most experienced DDA there. You ask who is Jeffrey Swartz ? It’s “Hugo” or Yougofree.com. Many people on the second floor courthouse only know Swartz as “Hugo”.
I don’t know why the PG hiree left. I could speculate or guess but that’s all it would be, Specultion. I can imagine any HC DDA with options would want to leave before the collapse, to avoid the taint.
enjoy the warm weather in SoHum
July 24, 2006 at 5:50 am
Eric V. Kirk
I confess that I’m simply repeating what I heard, which was that the initial turnover for Farmer was higher than Gallegos. I moved here in 96. I graduated from High School in 82. Re the presidential office comparison, I was trying to be flippant. The point is that a president pretty much replaces everybody when he’s in the opposite party of his predecessor, and even when he isn’t to a large degree. Allegations re Gallegos’ competency aside, the office functions much better if the majority of deputies shares his philosophy. Now you can argue that the DA’s office should be more like the assessor’s office where philosophy shouldn’t matter, but instead simply to “get the damned job done” to quote Hank Sims. But 4 years ago Gallegos defeated Farmer (a very nice guy to my experience) on the basis of a different philosophy about criminal justice – a philosophy clearly not shared by most of the remaining deputees and law enforcement. We can debate about the merits of that philosophy, but three elections have now confirmed that a controlling percentage of voters share that philosophy.
While it may not be true of cops (and I have no doubt they’re underpaid – these days in particular), there is a glut of attorneys in California, and many of them are unemployed. It’s an employer’s market. I’m certain there are experienced DA’s in the Bay Area or L.A. areas who share Gallegos’ basic philosophy and who are looking for a good place to retire. I’m certain that among the hundreds of them somebody has some administrative skills that Gallegos can depend on if he is indeed lacking in that area as alleged. I’ve personally been lobbying for Terrence Hallinan, who lost not because of his inability to administrate but due to a combination of some quixotic prosecutions that went nowhere and because he was facing a very capable liberal black woman in an opponent – and still it was close.
Which brings up a point I’ve made in the past. If competency is the issue, and not philosophy of justice, then Gallegos could easily have been defeated by an openly liberal opponent. Running Dikeman was the product of denial of the changing demographics, and confused the issue – assuming that competence really was the issue. The Dikeman supporters are going to have to concede the philosophical ground if they want to defeat Gallegos 4 years from now – who will only be better at his job. But I suspect that the philosophy is the core of the opposition, unlike the opposition of Hoover or Sims. Even the 48 percent Dikeman got included many liberals who voted on the competency issue.
I asked about why the particular hiree left because not everybody leaves a job due to dissatisfaction. A better offer, and opportunity in an area you’d prefer to live in, a change of scenery, etc. Maybe I’ll be proven wrong, but I suspect that the Chicken Little prophecies won’t materialize during 4 years in which Gallegos isn’t contending with a recall effort, internal undermining, and Tim Stoen which I admit was a bad hiring choice.
I fled SoHum today. Spent the day on the Samoa Dunes beach and the zoo with my kids.
July 25, 2006 at 1:37 am
Anonymous
Eric, maybe you could explain Mr. Gallegos’ philosophy of justice ? I really don’t understand. I’m actually baffled.
You are so right about the changing demographics. This is not the Humboldt County I grew up in, but I don’t think the change is good.
Hallinan ? I was just starting to think you maybe OK!
What if Chicken Little was right ?
July 25, 2006 at 6:46 am
Eric V. Kirk
Well, it’s like this. You push uncontrolled development and you’re going to bring in even more voters like me. That’s the irony that’s hit every coastal community in California. It happened to my hometowns of Pacifica and Half Moon Bay. If Arkley’s development package goes through, there will be even more of us. Keep dropping housing projects in McKinleyville, even more of us.
Is it all good? Well, I like the restaurants that are starting to pop up. Old Town is taking on a little bit of countercultural character. A neighbor of mine was joking that 30 years ago hippies weren’t even allowed in the Benbow Inn, and now hippies are demanding the right to bare their breasts in the same place. We have several radiostations with a countercultural bent.
On the other hand, some of the old character is being lost. For me it’s a mixed bag. I certainly don’t want to live in another Marin County.
Gallegos’ philosophy is to emphasize prevention and less so punishment. He campaigned on a promise to prosecute white collar crimes that his predecessor couldn’t be bothered with. He promised to tone down the war on marijuana. He’s campaigned openly on these issues. They weren’t secrets that he sprung on the public after promising to act like Dan Lungren.
So far, we haven’t seen chaos and disorder take over the streets, and it’s really the end product that matters.
And yeah, as a lefty native of the Bay Area I was raised with a respect for the entire Hallinan family. My father has stories about them. I learned even more about them when I was in law school, and had the opportunity to meet two of the brothers including Terrence “the conservative.” They’d make a great subject of a John Sayles movie.
July 26, 2006 at 6:37 am
Anonymous
I guess I should get out more Eric because I don’t know who John Sayles is, and I know a little.
I still don’t understand PG’s philosophy of justice….. to “emphasize prevention” but what has this emphasis on prevention done to prevent crime ? Do you have an example? I don’t see that lessening punishment will do anything to prevent crime, it just doesn’t make sense.
I don’t know that Farmer did a whole lot about “white collar crime”, but what has Gallegos done? He appointed Tim Stoen as the “white collar crime” prosecutor and all he did was go after PL, then D. August and when he FUBAR’d those two cases he left in disgrace (my opninion). You can’t call the PL suit “white collar crime” because it wasn’t a crime (even though some misguided beings acted like it was). Hiring a long time defense attorney (HUGO) to be a prosecutor and then hand out mamby pamby plea bargins/sentences is not prevetion it’s just not holding people accountable for their actions and will make the community less safe ! Don’t give me one example give me two ! I saw the re-election ads with Gallegos stating that he was going to prevent crime by preventing crime ? That sounded pretty stupid at the time and sounded even worse after seeing the commercial 3 or 4 times. Again what has PG done to prevent crime ?
As for Hallinan ….. no further comment is necessary.
I’m waiting ………
July 26, 2006 at 7:58 am
Eric V. Kirk
Well, you’re probably familiar with some of Sayles’ films. Eight Men Out? Lone Star? Sunshine State?
As to the philosophy, there are different philosophies of criminal justice, and as to which one “works best,” it’s an ongoing debate. Massachussetts has one of the lowest crime rates and has a very liberal criminal justice system. Houston executes more people than most states, and it’s one of the major murder capitols. On the other hand, NYC’s crime rate when down when a mayor got “tough.” On the other hand, crime rates in liberal portions Europe where the longest sentence for murder is 35 years have been low for decades. But then the question arises as to which is the cause and which is the effect. Is Massachussets more liberal because crime is lower or vice-versa? Do some policies work better in one area and not another based on local factors? It’s a huge topic on which volumes have been written, and the debate rages on and will probably continue to rage on. As it happens, the voters of Humboldt County have indicated a preference for a more liberal approach. Three times now.
As for Gallegos, there aren’t fewer trials happening to my knowledge. My civil cases still don’t go out often if Judge Brown is excluded by the other side because the courtrooms are full and criminal cases have priority. Plea bargaining is essential, and there’s no evidence that he is plea bargaining more often. He may be offering lesser sentences for nonviolent crimes – I don’t know if that’s the case but I hear it is – but again, that would be consistent with his mandate. He campaigned on that. It wasn’t a secret.
I don’t know how many white collar prosecutions went on before Gallegos, or during. I know that Gallegos claimed that white collar prosecutions were up, and Dikeman didn’t contradict him. I assume that if he could he would have. During the campaign he said that felony convictions were up 11%. Dikeman also failed to contradict that statement. I mean, we could pull out all the charts and relive the campaign debates, but if you really want to know what he’s done why don’t you contact him and ask him? I’m sure he could give you all the details you want.
Gallegos discussed his emphasis on prevention, which involves coordination with other non-law enforcement agencies, pro-active youth programs, etc. Many prosecutors would view that as a waste of time. Again, that’s the philosophy he campaigned on.
As for the Hallinan family, you’re right. Their contributions to the Bay Area are legend.
July 26, 2006 at 8:49 am
Anonymous
all that talk and you still did not answer my question …….
“what has Gallegos done to prevent crime” ….. the answer is NOTHING
plea bargains are essential but have seen what’s been going on .. with HUGO and just too few prosecutors ??
July 26, 2006 at 4:53 pm
Eric V. Kirk
Well, in addition to what I mentioned, he does what any other prosecutor does. He prosecutes and obtains convictions. And despite the loss of funding, he’s prosecuting more than before. And crime rates are lower than they’ve been in years, even in 2005.