Resolution on the Middle East Conflict

[WMS]

No longer voiceing our "wholehearted support" for Israel's "destruction of Hezballoh" is a fairly substantive change in policy.

Are you thus saying that your amendment would mean that the Senate would be declaring itself neutral with regard to Hezbollah's existence?

I'll tell you right now that if you want the Senate to adopt a neutral stance between Hezbollah and Israel I will definitely oppose that.

No.  Jas was saying Jake's amendment would make us seem neutral towards Hezbollah.  Jas's oirginal resolution favors Israel, but recognize the need to condemn Israel's attacks on civilians.

Accidential attacks on civilians are not the same as deliberate ones...a statement of concern and regret is more appropriate.

Not caring if you hit civilians or not is not the same as "accidental."

I disagree that that is the Israeli position - they are warning civilians in villages on the target list to leave. Hezbollah, on the other hand, is deliberately targeting civilians.

I am not disagreeing that Hezbollah's attacks are more immoral or that they are targeting civilians.

However the number of dead Israeli civilians and damaged infrastructure and buildiings is negligible compared to Lebanon.  Lebanon does not equal Hezbollah.

Israel warned civilians they were going to be bombed.  And then they bombed.  They didn't wait for evacuations or provide a route for Lebanese to escape.  They didn't care about the Lebanese.

Well, at least we agree on something.

I'm going to reiterate what I said early on in this war - are you certain those numbers are accurate? I get suspicious when the Lebanese government consistently reports 100% civilian casualties and 0% Hezbollah casualties.

Actually, they did provide time for the Lebanese to escape. If you have to blame somebody, blame Hezbollah, which both fires rockets from the midst of civilian areas and even forces people to remain in zones that received warnings of imminent bombing.

[ilikeverin]

Yes, Hezbollah is bad, but Israel deserves some sort of slap on the wrist or something for their actions.  MasterJedi/Jake's amendment seems to remove any sort of disapproval of Israel's actions at all.

[Јas]

I'll tell you right now that if you want the Senate to adopt a neutral stance between Hezbollah and Israel I will definitely oppose that.

No, that is not my position nor would I expect you or indeed any other Senator to support such a position. My question regarded the amendment submitted by Jake. I believe my original proposal clearly shows that I do not condone or accept the actions of Hezbollah.

However, there are many aspects of the Israeli actions which I also disapprove. Their attacks on Qana and on the UNIFIL base, in particular, stand out to me as acts which were either grossly negligent or outrightly malicious. I feel it is only right that we should say that Israel is not wholly within it's rights to carry out such attacks.

I am convinced that military action along the lines that is currently underway will not solve the problem. Israel will not be able to destroy Hezbollah in this way (if they could, why did they not do so during their occuption of Southern Lebanon?). The fighting is destroying the lives of too many innocent people. The sooner it ends the better and hopefully a political solution can be found to ensure the safety of citizens on both sides.

[Democratic Hawk]

It was the actions of Hezbollah not Israel that perpetrated this conflict; hence, why I've voted the way I have. I've nothing more to say on the subject but I urge that progress be made. This resolution has been on the floor of the Senate long enough as it is

'Hawk'

[Јas]

It was the actions of Hezbollah not Israel that perpetrated this conflict; hence, why I've voted the way I have. I've nothing more to say on the subject but I urge that progress be made. This resolution has been on the floor of the Senate long enough as it is

'Hawk'

May I ask what kind of progress do you mean?

[Democratic Hawk]

It was the actions of Hezbollah not Israel that perpetrated this conflict; hence, why I've voted the way I have. I've nothing more to say on the subject but I urge that progress be made. This resolution has been on the floor of the Senate long enough as it is

'Hawk'

May I ask what kind of progress do you mean?

Of course Senator, I refer to progress as in moving progress so that the Senate adopts a resolution one way or the other as soon as possible.

The problem is one of gridlock as to where we stand on Israel and we'll need the Vice-President to break it. Still, at least, we seem to be united on Hizbollah

For the reasons I have cited I favor the MasterJedi and Jake resolutions; however, a compromise might be to strike all reference to Israel in the resolution that way we can pass a resolution condeming Hizbollah - and rightfully so. We could then pass a separate resolution supporting Israel. Nevertheless, I don't think its the right way to go about things far from it but it could be preferable to the situation we currently have

That said, as it currently stands, by my reckoning the vote on Jake's amendment stands at 4 in favor, 3 against, so it may pass yet, which would make what I've suggested, above, moot. If it fails, the Senate should then consider your resolution but if that fails, then the Senate can consider Jake's revised amendment - and if that fails, then I see no other option other than 'separate' resolutions, in the event of the Vice-President not being present to break any tied votes. Nevertheless, I hope the idea of 'separate' resolutions can be avoided

'Hawk'

[jerusalemcar5]

Any resolution not offering some kind of condemnation or displeasure with Israel's actions holds no weight.

[WMS]

I'm willing to go as far as a statement of concern and regret over the accidental civilian deaths caused by Israeli action.

[MasterJedi]

Being that this amendment has been open for voting for seven days: With 4 Ayes, 3 Nays and 0 Abstentions this amendment has passed.

[Јas]

Being that this amendment has been open for voting for seven days: With 4 Ayes, 3 Nays and 0 Abstentions this amendment has passed.

A disappointing result. A declaration by the Atlasian government that Israel has done no wrong provides no incentive for them to cease their actions which have only resulted in shoring up support for Hezbollah amongst the innocent people whose lives have been devestated by Israeli attacks. Hezbollah are clearly capable of fighting an effective guerrilla war, they have increasing support amongst their community. They simply cannot be defeated by the sort of brute force the IDF have displayed.

To achieve peace a political accomodation must be found that pacifies the ordinary people such that Hezbollah's attacks are seen within that community as nothing more than provocative warmongering.

[jerusalemcar5]

*Sigh*.  Now Ebowed will veto and we won't override.  Horrible amendment.

[MasterJedi]

I would like to apologize to missing this but: I hereby open up the vote on this amendment. Please vote Aye, Nay or Abstain.

I would also like to propose an amendment to be added to the resolution:

Recognising the profoundly detrimental effect the conflict has had on innocent persons in the region, the Senate calls upon the Atlasian executive to persue active engagement in the conflict with the objective of ending the hostilities there with due haste.

[MasterJedi]

Nay

[ilikeverin]

Yup

[Јas]

Aye

[jerusalemcar5]

Aye.

[Jake]

Nay

[Hatman 🍁]

Aye

[Democratic Hawk]

Israel defended itself by seeking to root out her Hizbollah aggressors from their strongholds in southern Lebanon and parts of Beirut; therefore, I can only vote Nay

'Hawk'

[WMS]

Abstain. The damn war's over anyway...for the moment...

[bgwah]

Nay

[Јas]

Israel defended itself by seeking to root out her Hizbollah aggressors from their strongholds in southern Lebanon and parts of Beirut; therefore, I can only vote Nay

'Hawk'

The Israeli actions ultimately resulted in Hezbollah stepping up its attacks leading to further loss of Israeli life.
Hezbollah has evidently not been defeated.
Their capability to fire into Israel has not been ended.
Their support amonst the people of Southern Lebanon has increased.
While there are conflicting reports as to how many casualties/fatalities Hezbollah fighters have taken, there is no doubt that it is ordinary citizens who have borne the brunt of the Israeli force.

The Israeli 'defensive' actions have been ineffective, indeed counter-productive.

The damn war's over anyway...for the moment...

We have had no word from the GM, the President or the Secretary of State as to any peace initiatives. The only way Israel would ceasefire would be under Atlasian pressure. The Senate, it seems, is not willing to send such a signal. There is no evidence to suggest the executive is willing to do so either. In the absence of either, it is reasonable to assume that no UN resolution calling for a ceasefire could pass. It would also seem reasonable to work under the assumption that the conflict continues.

[afleitch]

We have had no word from the GM, the President or the Secretary of State as to any peace initiatives.

We had no word from the GM originally on whether or not there was a war in the first place! I was chastised for mentioning it last month and had to say it was based on 'outside sources' I'm sure the same 'outside sources' would tell us that we now had a shaky ceasefire.

[MasterJedi]

Virginian87 still needs to vote for this amendment.....

[Virginian87]

Nay.