While I agree with most of what Chomsky says and find his views interesting, I have a question about something he said in one of his talks regarding the Israeli response to Hezbollah's firing rockets into Israeli territory. Chomsky said the way to stop the bombing would be to cease hostile action, and went on to say the way for British forces to stop attacks by American militias during the revolutionary war would, similarly, have been to simply withdraw.

A critic would likely say such a response amounts to capitulation and anyone following Chomsky's advice would be sending a message to all their enemies that they could be attacked with impunity. Only a naive academic, some would say, would recommend such a course, but no real-world government could afford to follow it as the result would inevitably be to reduce the safety of the citizens whom it is their primary responsibility to protect. Further, Chomsky often compares the U.S. in the international arena today to a Mafia Don who makes examples of those who ignore his rule; but what would he say to a critic who says the Don is wise because he realises the importance of reputation within the world he inhabits, and the dire consequences that may ensue upon any show of weakness?

This is not to say I believe the Israeli response to Hezbollah rocket attacks was appropriate or commensurate, but to suggest that Israel should have taken no punitive action whatsoever seems open to question. How would Chomsky reply?

If a dog bites you when you kick it, the best way to stop it from biting you is to stop kicking it. I doubt Chomsky would put it in those terms, but clearly the most effective strategy that Israel could employ in preventing attacks against it would be to stop the abuses and disproportional reprisals that are very reason for the existence of Hamas and Hezbollah.

Israel, though, is not interested in pragmatic solutions. It is interested in expanding its territory through occupation and colonization. This type of undertaking is dirty business, thus making the mafia tactics you describe a necessity.

Sounds, like you were never bitten by a dog. A angry,
carnivorous dog, does not stop biting just because you move away. The dog is still angry , and the only way that this dog will stop , is when fear is installed in the dog -
that the victim will defend themself and might just
beat up the dog.

Dog??

we will stand...kill my people...and we will be stronger....this land have always been ours and soon it will be back to his reall owner...call us terrorist ....not importent...we will stand

You say "This Land have always been ours"

Is this based on the Bible?

Does the Bible say who the "reall owner" is?

Yes, terrorism is a program of violence conducted by a group of folks against innocent people .

The correct response to Hezbollah is wiping them off the face of the earth. Just like they want to do to the Jewish people.

Violent retaliation has only escalated tensions and prolonged conflict between the Jewish State and the exiled Palestinian people from its very beginning. While I may not live to truly understand the feeling of loathing towards one side or the loss of a loved one in some unexpected terrorist attack, at the same time there can be no hope of resolution or even at restitution if each side isn't willing to turn towards some internationally-backed form of collective bargaining.

Rather than point at the other side and dismiss who they are as human beings, we need to look inwards and judge ourselves in the way that we decide to respond. Its important to keep in mind that while we may not be able to control an entire group of people, there are chances to mend wounds starting at a grass roots level and building from the ground up. Politicians and governments aren't interested in identifying one group or another as people with rights. Only the people can come together and show that they are not above seeking to rectify their relations with their neighbors.

While I am aware that there have been a number of atrocities caused on both sides resulting in many deaths and suffering, we can only decide as individuals how we choose to respond. If we were to look at each other separate from either national or religious affiliation, we would find that we all have hopes and dreams that we would like to make possible both for ourselves and our children. There is then no reason why we should continue to let the political establishment seek to divide us and fill us with fear if we can recognize that everyone regardless of who they are should be counted.