Israel attack Liban

[KrooK]

Today Israel attacked Liban. They explain that they have to defend their country and they were attacked earlier.
In 1939 Germans were telling something really similar. And of course small, poor liban is great danger for Israel, so time on my comment;

SIEG SHALOM ISRAEL

You learnt much from III Reich.



To moderator, admin, et cetera....
Everyone can speak his mind.

[Vladimir]

I can't find Liban on a map. Can someone help me? :book:

[Devastatin Dave]

I can't find Liban on a map. Can someone help me? :book:
Its next to Syrianna and Iraqiopia.:laugh4:

This should get interesting.

[Csargo]

Very interesting

[Louis VI the Fat]

I might as well provide a link. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5173078.stm)


SIEG SHALOM ISRAEL

You learnt much from III Reich.Israel has repeatedly crossed the line of what is acceptable behaviour for a democracy, even when considering it's special circumstances. But to compare it with the Third Reich is in poor taste.

Maybe Poland shouldn't rename Auschwitz-Birkenau into the 'former German concentration camp Auschwitz' just yet. Or hide it behind Supermarkets and fastfood outlets.

[Vladimir]

Ok, let's keep this dead horse on life support. You care to expand on how they have "crossed the line" considering their situation? It reminds me of a poll of Brits with the majority saying that Israel should make more concessions. You can't make concessions with someone who wants you dead. The negotiations with Arafat proved that. Half-dead doesn’t cut it.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Louis:

I agree that characterizing Israel as Nazi is a little harsh -- even if, like yourself, you disagree with their actions. I am not sure that I disagree with their actions in this instance.

What would be an appropriate response to a specific attack on the Israeli military resulting in 7 dead and 2 captured and held hostage?

Krook:

In 1939, Nazi operatives under Heydrich actually staged an attack on a German radio station and murdered several people (criminals brought in for the task?) to make it look to be the work of murderous Polish terrorists. This became one of the pretexts used to invade Poland. By contrast, all available evidence suggests that the Israelis were attacked by Hez Bollah [sic?] forces operating from Southern Lebanon. I don't think your parallel is accurate.

[Dâriûsh]

Uh-oh... :juggle2:

[Redleg]

Uh-oh... :juggle2:

I have to agree with you... Uh-oh......

[Louis VI the Fat]

What would be an appropriate response to a specific attack on the Israeli military resulting in 7 dead and 2 captured and held hostage?Appropriate for Israel would be to finally accept that it needs to negotiate a workable peace with it's neighbours. Likewise, the neighbouring Arab states need to accept that Israel will stay.

Appropriate in this case in particular would be the use of proportional force.

For example, would you support Israel setting of eight bombs on trains in Beirut? Killing 180 people? I think not, we would both deem that an act of terrorism.
In the past two weeks, Israels' behaviour in the Gaza strip and Lebanon has been an effort to terrorize the civilian population. It is not called terrorism for no other reason than that old adage that states that 'terrorists is what the large army calls the small army'.

[Grey_Fox]

Liban is probably the Polish term for Lebanon, don't be too harsh on Krook, he means well.

I believe Hezbollah and elements of Hamas have been firing an average of 100 missiles at Israeli towns a month during the so-called 'peace'. Pity the media decided not say that, instead concentrating on the peaceful flower-picking Palestinians who only want to bring peace and love to the world and the evil Jews who want to kill them all.

[Devastatin Dave]

Liban is probably the Polish term for Lebanon, don't be too harsh on Krook, he means well.

I believe Hebollah and elements of Hamas have been firing an average of 100 missiles at Israeli towns a month during the so-called 'peace'. Pity the media decided not say that, instead concentrating on the peaceful flower-picking Palestinians who only want to bring peace and love to the world and the evil Jews who want to kill them all.
You're right, sorry Krook...
I completely agree on the rest of your post. The media is the greatest propoganda tool for the Palestinians. And some say the "Jews" run the media!!! LOL

[x-dANGEr]

@Grey Fox, Dave: How do you judge that ? You guys live here or what ?! A little note: Hamas can't supply 100 missiles a month + Hesbullah regular missile attacks (If any) are when Israeli army crosses the borders.


What would be an appropriate response to a specific attack on the Israeli military resulting in 7 dead and 2 captured and held hostage?
I said it 100 times, but no one seems to read.. Maybe release the prisoners? Those taken for no reason? (Most of them are, at least. And then, believe me, neither Hesbullah nor any other resistance foundation would do anything to Israel, as long as arms are kept "calm" from both ends).

[Vladimir]

Ok Louis, I already told you what happens when you try to negotiate with their "neighbors" as you put it. The result is that you go nowhere. You don't negotiate with someone bent on your destruction. Hamas' resolve to destroy Israel has been demonstrated in word and deed. Isn't that what the withdrawal was about?

And X, do you really want to give in to kidnapping? It's the same thing with (officially) negotiating with terrorists. If you give into extortion it will only get worse. And the terrorizing of civilians, bombing of open areas and such, come on; it's like blaring rock and roll music at bank robbers barricaded in a bank. Loud noises and scary lights is hardly terrorizing. 100 missiles a month isn't a lot if you're receiving a lot of help from outside sources. Besides, you can't justify launching rockets at civilian targets because of an incursion. If you want to fight, fight the incursion.

This thread isn't going to be locked is it? :sweatdrop:

[Grey_Fox]

@Grey Fox, Dave: How do you judge that ? You guys live here or what ?! A little note: Hamas can't supply 100 missiles a month + Hesbullah regular missile attacks (If any) are when Israeli army crosses the borders.

Israeli friends. Also from King Haggard over at totalwar.com and the Pond who is IDF.

Also the arms probably come from the same people supplying the Iraqi insurgents.

[Redleg]

A web search of news articles looking for the key words "Hebollah" "Hamas" "Israel" and "Missile" brings the following articles




http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50454

An interesting article - one that points out that Hamas is working on developing a electonic guided missle.

Since Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip nine months ago, more than 300 rockets, mostly Qassams, have been fired at adjacent Jewish neighborhoods. More than 10 rockets were fired last week alone.

The Israeli army largely has attempted to halt Qassam rocket fire mostly utilizing artillery units and aerial strikes against suspected launching sites, but the operations have failed to stem the flow of Palestinian rocket attacks. Israel earlier this week carried out a raid deep inside Gaza, reportedly the first of its kind since withdrawing from the territory last August.






http://www.aijac.org.au/updates/May-06/300506.html#Article_

A times article that was linked to the above site.

Now, after Arafat's death and Hamas' rise to political power, chieftains aligned with the defeated Fatah faction, which Arafat once led, are scrambling to retain influence and control of their own bands of armed followers, even while taking on the fighters of Hamas.

"More and more, Gaza is ruled by warlords," said Eyad Sarraj, who heads a human rights group in the seaside territory where gunmen, in or out of uniform, can be seen on almost every street corner. "We are turning into a kind of Somalia. And this is Arafat's legacy."

[solypsist]

i'm going to give the spelling the benefit of the doubt and ask if Liban is a non-English spelling of Lebanon; the way Turin and Torino are the same city in Italy.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Does it matter?

To be perfectly honest the creation Isreal has to rank as one of the greatest humanitarin crimes of the last century. You cannot expect a people to just role over when you take their land, or their neighbors land.

Regardless the Arab nations are willing to negotiate these days and the use of military invasion or shelling is unwarrented, because it doesn't work and it causes too much collateral damage. You want to stop something like this? You get down and dirty with Black Ops.

The head of my departement at my University is proffesionally boycotting Isreal and anyone that does not dissacociate themselves with the regime.

If any other country was doing this there would be outrage and cries of "sanctions."

[UglyandHasty]

i'm going to give the spelling the benefit of the doubt and ask if Liban is a non-English spelling of Lebanon; the way Turin and Torino are the same city in Italy.


Liban is Lebanon in french

[Louis VI the Fat]

Le Liban is what Lebanon calls itself, in French.

Edit: Gah, beaten by a Québécois. :furious3:

[Strike For The South]

People lets wake up. If Isreal wasnt Isreal theyd be royally shunned and be on the same plane as North Korea. If it wasnt for my countries blind support theyd already be there. I support a sperate Palistinan nation and all that good stuff. I also belive there is a HUGE jewish lobby in the USA however the reason we support the Isrealis is becuase they are thorns in the side of the arabs. The bottom line is this Isreal is a horrible country which uses America to forwared its intrests (not to mention steal our damned tech) I hope America stays out of this and Isreal has to fight on its own.

[Reenk Roink]

No qualms with the invasion in itself but...if Israel is like Israel, the civilian deaths will be through the roof... :shame:

Got huge qualms with that...

[Red Peasant]

People lets wake up. If Isreal wasnt Isreal theyd be royally shunned and be on the same plane as North Korea. If it wasnt for my countries blind support theyd already be there. I support a sperate Palistinan nation and all that good stuff. I also belive there is a HUGE jewish lobby in the USA however the reason we support the Isrealis is becuase they are thorns in the side of the arabs. The bottom line is this Isreal is a horrible country which uses America to forwared its intrests (not to mention steal our damned tech) I hope America stays out of this and Isreal has to fight on its own.

I'm sure Israel will do fine on its own.

If a Lebanese faction attacks another country then it can expect itself to be at war. I'm sure the US would react rather more harshly if, say, Canada or Mexico were lobbing missiles over the border on a regular basis, attacking their military and kidnapping their troops. The Yanks here would be demanding that those countries be turned to glass no doubt.

I don't know what the Israeli premier did wrong, he came into office on a ticket of making more concessions to the Palestinians and before he can do anything every terrorist in the mid-East is taking pot-shots. They smell weakness and they're obviously in no mood for negotiations.

[A.Saturnus]

Ok Louis, I already told you what happens when you try to negotiate with their "neighbors" as you put it. The result is that you go nowhere. You don't negotiate with someone bent on your destruction. Hamas' resolve to destroy Israel has been demonstrated in word and deed. Isn't that what the withdrawal was about?


Lebanon surely doesn't like Israel (why should they?) but Israel's destruction is not part of their official policy. Lebanon is currently not officially at war with Israel. A fact that is ignored by Israel and Hezbollah. That's not the only thing they have in common.

[Bar Kochba]

because just before he caim in to power israel gave away land and now every tom dick and harry (or muhammed) thinks they can get another piece of it

[Divinus Arma]

People lets wake up. If Isreal wasnt Isreal theyd be royally shunned and be on the same plane as North Korea. If it wasnt for my countries blind support theyd already be there. I support a sperate Palistinan nation and all that good stuff. I also belive there is a HUGE jewish lobby in the USA however the reason we support the Isrealis is becuase they are thorns in the side of the arabs. The bottom line is this Isreal is a horrible country which uses America to forwared its intrests (not to mention steal our damned tech) I hope America stays out of this and Isreal has to fight on its own.

The difference is the Israel is a Democratically elected government that extends freedom and prosperity to its people. It only acts to defend itself, not gain additional resources from the world body.

Alternatively, North Korea ia repressive Dictatorship that holds neighboring countries hostage in order to secure resources from international bodies.


I say to all,
I will not argue on the topic of whom was origainally entitled to what because it results in permanent violence. After all, Engalnd and France had claims on each others' territories and waged wars against each other for centuries because of those claims.

We must recognize the situation as it stands now, affirm Israel's right to exist as well as the right of a free Palestinian state. The Israeilis have been unable to attain coopeation from the Palestinian Authority despite pulling out of Gaza, dismantling settlements, and taking diplomatic steps towards a two-state solution. The election of Hamas represents the will of the Palestinian people to engage Israel with violence in order to meet its objectives.

Furthermore, if Israel acquiesces to the hostage takers, it will only encourage more hostage taking. And how is Israel to respond to rocket shelling from the Palestinian territories? Better question: How is Israel to respond to to rocket shelling fired from behgind civilian areas in Palestian territories?

[Strike For The South]

I'm sure Israel will do fine on its own.

If a Lebanese faction attacks another country then it can expect itself to be at war. I'm sure the US would react rather more harshly if, say, Canada or Mexico were lobbing missiles over the border on a regular basis, attacking their military and kidnapping their troops. The Yanks here would be demanding that those countries be turned to glass no doubt.

I don't know what the Israeli premier did wrong, he came into office on a ticket of making more concessions to the Palestinians and before he can do anything every terrorist in the mid-East is taking pot-shots. They smell weakness and they're obviously in no mood for negotiations.

Point taken. However you and I both know Isreal thinks its proverbial **** dont stink and blindly beleive there right (which no country is). My whole thing is Isreal has convonced a great portion of my country that there little strip of land and there cuase there issuses were more important than anyone elses. The news here exalts the Isrealises and shows the Palestinains as dogs. What the Palistenians is doing is wrong but the Isrealis and to some extent my country has put them in that positon.

[Ice]

What the Palistenians is doing is wrong but the Isrealis and to some extent my country has put them in that positon.

Please Clarify that.

[Bar Kochba]

and maybe the title of this thread should be hizbullah attack kidnap 2 israeli soldiers kill 8 more and then israel reitaliates which country would just let there captured soldiers not be rescued?

[Keba]

and maybe the title of this thread should be hizbullah attack kidnap 2 israeli soldiers kill 8 more and then israel reitaliates which country would just let there captured soldiers not be rescued?

Very few countries would engage in rescue operations with armor columns and thousands of soldiers. Both you, me, and everyone on these fora knows that the Mossad could solve this in under an hour, without any Israeli casualties (and only a few terrorist ones, but those people are guilty).

This sort of heavy-handed approach is not befitting a democratic country. I do not say that they should have shut up and negotiated ... but launching a full-scale invasion over two soldiers is idiotic.

*Sigh* If it weren't for the US, Israel would be at least a bit more courteous. How do you expect the Arabic countries to react when your first move is to bash them, then, if that doesn't work, call in the world's only superpower to come to it's aid.

Didn't they already learn that responding to terrorists with tank divisions and army operations is counterproductive? All it does is give more men and materiel to the terrorists, which the operations are meant to curb. :no:

[Crazed Rabbit]

Today Israel attacked Liban. They explain that they have to defend their country and they were attacked earlier.
In 1939 Germans were telling something really similar. And of course small, poor liban is great danger for Israel, so time on my comment;

SIEG SHALOM ISRAEL

You learnt much from III Reich.

To moderator, admin, et cetera....
Everyone can speak his mind.

How about you get a clue?

Lebanese sheltered terrorists kidnapped two Israeli soldiers and attacked IDF near Northern Israel. That's called an act of war.


Regardless the Arab nations are willing to negotiate these days and the use of military invasion or shelling is unwarrented, because it doesn't work and it causes too much collateral damage. You want to stop something like this? You get down and dirty with Black Ops.

There's a good reason for not negotiating with terrorists- you'd just encourage more kidnappings.


The head of my departement at my University is proffesionally boycotting Isreal and anyone that does not dissacociate themselves with the regime.

What makes me think he does not do the same for Palestine?


If any other country was doing this there would be outrage and cries of "sanctions."

On Lebanon, you mean?

Surprisingly, I mostly agree with Red Peasant.

Israel unilaterally pulled out of Gaza- which the Palestinians converted into a rocket pad very quickly. What makes people think the Palestinians will act any differently with other concessions?

Crazed Rabbit

[Ice]

Very few countries would engage in rescue operations with armor columns and thousands of soldiers. Both you, me, and everyone on these fora knows that the Mossad could solve this in under an hour, without any Israeli casualties (and only a few terrorist ones, but those people are guilty).

This sort of heavy-handed approach is not befitting a democratic country. I do not say that they should have shut up and negotiated ... but launching a full-scale invasion over two soldiers is idiotic.

*Sigh* If it weren't for the US, Israel would be at least a bit more courteous. How do you expect the Arabic countries to react when your first move is to bash them, then, if that doesn't work, call in the world's only superpower to come to it's aid.

Didn't they already learn that responding to terrorists with tank divisions and army operations is counterproductive? All it does is give more men and materiel to the terrorists, which the operations are meant to curb. :no:

How would you feel if you pulled out of Gaza and get repaid by constant rocket attacks and a kidnapping/ransom demand of one of your soldiers? You can only poke the stronger man with a stick for so long before he gets pissed off and puts his foot up your ass.

[Strike For The South]

Please Clarify that.

Well we have given Isreal the means and they have used them to repress an entire populace:inquisitive:

[Csargo]

Well we have given Isreal the means and they have used them to repress an entire populace:inquisitive:

I don't know where you got that from.:dizzy2:

[Ice]

Well we have given Isreal the means and they have used them to repress an entire populace:inquisitive:

Again... clarify what you mean. Specfic instances?

[Vladimir]

Well we have given Isreal the means and they have used them to repress an entire populace:inquisitive:

Wow, not a clue. You will find Palestinian members of the Israeli government, living side by side with Jews in Israel. The only Jew or Israeli you'll find in the Palestinian territories is dead, about to be dead, or armed and very pissed. Perhaps Israel should treat the Palestinians the same way the Jordanians and other Arab countries did, by slaughtering them. Take a look at how Jordan handled that problem in the 50's.

People always love to pick on big bad Israel, after all, that state shouldn't exist anyway right? Did anyone see the elected member of the Palestinian parliament that was proud she had three sons die as suicide bombers and wanted to have more just so that they could kill more Jews *elected!*? Those people remind me of the Ku Ku Klanners in the US. What we're fighting is a culture of death and they are the true repressors, just look at how they treat their own. Besides, can anyone here support an organization that is backed by the hard line government in Iran? The line about the boycotting professor is priceless too.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Well we have given Isreal the means and they have used them to repress an entire populace:inquisitive:

Ice et. al: From reading earlier threads, it should be noted that the above is an EXACT summary of the position many Palestinians take on the issue, and one that is taught in their schools. Most of us view the USA as having assisted in the economic development of Israel and in providing for its defense (my view, btw), but to many Palestinians the very existence of Israel was an act of oppression rammed through the UN by the USA and the continued existence of the camps and Israel's disregard for Palestinian sovereignty an ongoing effort to oppress them.

Unlike at least one previous poster, I do not agree that the creation of Israel was a crime against morality – but it is apparent that possible long-term consequences were not fully considered. It would be hard to find another U.N. decision that has resulted in more bloodshed and turmoil, despite its noble intentions at the outset.

What to do now?

Israel IS in existence, has built a nation and culture of its own, and seems capable of defending itself. Most nations, if attacked, would choose some form of retaliation. Both the Palestinians and the Israelis view themselves as having been attacked and seek to retaliate.

There is one fundamental difference. Many of Israel’s opponents make no distinction whatsoever between civilian and non-civilian targets, with many purposefully selecting the “softer” civilian targets to minimize risk and/or maximize casualties. Israel, for all that it seems too cavalier about “collateral damage” (and I believe they have been at times), does not seek to target un-involved civilians.

Hezbollah’s latest attack was, at least, aiming for a military target – but the attacks from Gaza have been far more indiscriminate.

Louis suggests that a more “proportional” response is appropriate -- I disagree. I do not advocate nor would I condone the targeting of civilians – we concur fully in that, but I believe that the attack should provoke a broader and more damaging response, aiming to destroy the extra-national actor if possible, or to severely degrade their abilities if not. A proportional response would only beget more attacks. The better strategy is to build intelligence data and then strike to maximize damage.

Should the counter be with columns of troops? With surgical air-attacks? With covert assassinations/abductions? No one tactic should be relied upon entirely. A combination of all/several approaches is probably the most likely.

I disagree with those who always decry the use of the military because its use creates bad feelings. Their rationale is always "if you use the military, people will feel oppressed/be harmed thereby and the bad guys will have greater support and recruiting." Extending that logic, the best alternative is to disband the military. Can't use them, so they're just a waste of shekels. Too many folks have impression that the guerilla/terrorist will always win -- that it is impossible to counter low-intensity conflict -- but the number of guerilla/terrorist campaigns that win without first changing into a main-stream military effort is relatively few.

Sorry, I'll try to shut up sooner next time.

[Ice]

I agree 100% with the above.

[Divinus Arma]

Go Israel.

I second that motion and move for ratification in the Great Book of Conservatism.

All those who disagree, strap on a boomski device in support of your beloved Hamas. Go find a bus filled with women and children in Tel Aviv.



That was a joke. :inquisitive:

Go Israel. :israel:

[kataphraktoi]

WHat's wrong with the existence of Israel? Its a created state like all the other Arab states - based on conquest in the first place. We know that before the Arab conquest, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Iraq and Libya were not Arabic, and now they are Arabic through conquest. But we accept it do we not? Likewise, Israel is a product of conquest. Where once was an Arabic population is now an Arabic minority. I really do feel sorry for the Palestinians, but its their "Arab" brothers who have screwed them for refusing to negotiate a peace feal early after the 1948 war of independence or Al-Nakhba according to the Arabs. They kept them in squalor and used them as "propaganda" fodder to gain sympathy from the international community.

Heck, most of the states of the world was created through warfare and the displacement of other people. Lets just be a bit more wary before we call other people's country a mistake when our on country has done the thing ok?

No one is going suggest that America is mistake are they? (unless u really really hate Bush:P)

No is going to suggest that Britain is a mistake are they? (they made CA in the first place :D)

No is going to suggest China is a mistake are they? (Thank goodness for b-grade kung fu movies, chinese takeaway, and cheap goods ;)

[Justiciar]

No is going to suggest that Britain is a mistake are they?
If by Britain you mean the UK.. I might, if I weren't so bloody tired.

[PanzerJaeger]

This is just common sense.

If any nation is attacked constantly with rockets and has its soldiers killed and kidnapped, its government has an obligation to its populace to end the attacks.


People lets wake up. If Isreal wasnt Isreal theyd be royally shunned and be on the same plane as North Korea. If it wasnt for my countries blind support theyd already be there. I support a sperate Palistinan nation and all that good stuff. I also belive there is a HUGE jewish lobby in the USA however the reason we support the Isrealis is becuase they are thorns in the side of the arabs. The bottom line is this Isreal is a horrible country which uses America to forwared its intrests (not to mention steal our damned tech) I hope America stays out of this and Isreal has to fight on its own.

:laugh4:



:laugh4:



Go Israel. :israel:

[Ironside]

Let see now, we got a faction with considerble political influence that has justified thier existance by claiming the destruction of thier enemy. Since the conflict has almost stopped, they have constantly lost power and the calls for disarment has been growing stronger.

And then out of the blue, they "accidently" provoked a massive response from thier official enemy...

I can only hope that Israel plays this on the method of making the attack from Hizbollah looking very useless and damaging to Lebanon, while not villify themself too much in the process.
If Israel decides to re-occupy parts of Lebanon or has a large collateral damage record, I'm going to call them fools that prefer this situation compared to peace. :no:


What would be an appropriate response to a specific attack on the Israeli military resulting in 7 dead and 2 captured and held hostage?

An attack that results in 7 dead and 2 captured Hizbollah members. Sure, if you could kill 70 Hizbollah members then it's fine, but not if the civilian casulities starts to reak up.
The one of mine = 100 of yours anti-partisan tactics doesn't work to well, if you simply starts killing more or less random people as they're "collaborators", more of the opposite.

[Keba]

How would you feel if you pulled out of Gaza and get repaid by constant rocket attacks and a kidnapping/ransom demand of one of your soldiers? You can only poke the stronger man with a stick for so long before he gets pissed off and puts his foot up your ass.

Actually, I was referring to the situation with the incursion into Lebanon ... I'm keeping neutral on the Gaza situations ... I find Israel's tactics too heavy handed for my taste, but I dislike more the tactics employed by the terrorists. Although, I'm going to point out, that these tactics only make the terrorists stronger, and the situation later on will be that Israel will face a much more powerful enemy.

A normal country would usually employ a somewhat different tactic when someone fires missiles over the border ... send the country's goverment an ultimatum to get rid of the terrorists, or the army will move in to handle the situation.

I'm not saying it's America's or the US' fault ... it's the British, they just began moving Jews into Palestine ignoring everything that the locals said, then, when the locals objected, strong-arming them into submission. After Israel was formed, things stayed the same. No wonder the place is so messed up.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

No one is going suggest that America is mistake are they? (unless u really really hate Bush:P)

Actually, I think Freud said America was a "giant mistake" but I forget the context. :2thumbsup:

Fe-side:

I agree with you about avoiding civilian casualties -- and acknowledge that Israel has created more than necessary of same -- but a 7&2 for 7&2 program only perpetuates the "Hatfields v McCoys" thing that they already have going on and has zero chance of effecting a solution -- hence my alternative proposal.

[x-dANGEr]

Since Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip nine months ago, more than 300 rockets, mostly Qassams, have been fired at adjacent Jewish neighborhoods. More than 10 rockets were fired last week alone.
Read the word: Nine.


I'm sure the US would react rather more harshly if, say, Canada or Mexico were lobbing missiles over the border on a regular basis, attacking their military and kidnapping their troops. The Yanks here would be demanding that those countries be turned to glass no doubt.

A very flawed comparision. As far as I know, USA hasn't attacked Canada/Mexico, and hasn't been killing chunks of their people for the last 4 decades. And also, USA isn't in anyway captivating a lot of Canadians/Mexicans from their own lands (Like, it hasn't went into Canada, took 10 people and throw them in its prisons).

I don't know what the Israeli premier did wrong, he came into office on a ticket of making more concessions to the Palestinians and before he can do anything every terrorist in the mid-East is taking pot-shots. They smell weakness and they're obviously in no mood for negotiations.

Captives, captives and captives..

We must recognize the situation as it stands now, affirm Israel's right to exist as well as the right of a free Palestinian state. The Israeilis have been unable to attain coopeation from the Palestinian Authority despite pulling out of Gaza, dismantling settlements, and taking diplomatic steps towards a two-state solution. The election of Hamas represents the will of the Palestinian people to engage Israel with violence in order to meet its objectives.

Pulling out of Gaza: You mean pulling out of a city with no buildings not raised?
Dismantling settlements: In places where it'd cost more to keep than leave?

Furthermore, if Israel acquiesces to the hostage takers, it will only encourage more hostage taking. And how is Israel to respond to rocket shelling from the Palestinian territories? Better question: How is Israel to respond to to rocket shelling fired from behgind civilian areas in Palestian territories?
I guess giving them what they want would be the best option. If all captives (That are captived with no right at all, or if you want to discard all that crap: WAR) are freed, there will be no motive for Lebanese or Palestinieans to wage war. And if there would be some extremist groups, they wouldn't receive any support.

and maybe the title of this thread should be hizbullah attack kidnap 2 israeli soldiers kill 8 more and then israel reitaliates which country would just let there captured soldiers not be rescued?

You said it: Soldiers. Not civilians, and I think that covers it.


Didn't they already learn that responding to terrorists with tank divisions and army operations is counterproductive? All it does is give more men and materiel to the terrorists, which the operations are meant to curb. Last time I discussed the term "Terrorists" in the ORG, I got answered that it refers to those who terrorize and kill civilians. Now, just as I said before: How can you rank Hesbullah as a "terrorist" when he does neither of both?


There's a good reason for not negotiating with terrorists- you'd just encourage more kidnappings.
Those kidnappings are justified, as they are for enemy soldiers, and the enemy have a LOT more already "kidnapped".


Go Israel.
I second that motion and move for ratification in the Great Book of Conservatism.
I think if you are so biased, you shouldn't even try to argue.

[Reenk Roink]

Let's just see how badly Israel shoots itself in the foot with it's terrorism from above... oops... I mean heavy yet "justifiable collateral damage".

[Redleg]

Read the word: Nine.

Yes indeed x-danger read the word nine. Since Israel's withdraw from the Gaza Strip 300 missiles have been fired into Israel. In other words for the last nine monthes violence has been occuring by both sides. The Palenstine Terrorist groups such as Hezbelloh and Hamas do not want peace with Israel only its destruction.

Now Israel is just as flawed with a recent artillery strike on a beach and now attacking into another nation going after a terrorist group.

Both sides are equally at fault in the violence. Remember it takes two to have a fight.




A very flawed comparision. As far as I know, USA hasn't attacked Canada/Mexico, and hasn't been killing chunks of their people for the last 4 decades. And also, USA isn't in anyway captivating a lot of Canadians/Mexicans from their own lands (Like, it hasn't went into Canada, took 10 people and throw them in its prisons).


THe United States does extradiction all the time with both Canada and Mexico. The United States even has some bounty hunters that go into Mexico and take fugitives from justice.

The flaw is that Hezbelloh has been attacking Israel from the border areas and believes that Lebanon is a safe haven for them. Well Israel is guilty of an act of war against Lebanon because it sent its army across the border. But then the United States has done that with Mexico (a historical point) when we sent troops south into Mexico in an attempt to capture Pancho Villa. Lebanon might want to review its policies about Hezbelloh if it does not want another nation to remove a criminal element that strikes across into their border. It does not make what Israel is doing right - but it does make it understandable. When the police of the nation refuse to address the criminal element eventual someone else will.




Captives, captives and captives..


Palenstine prisoners captured by Israel for doing criminal acts are not capitives. People taken without criminal charges are indeed captives. So are you attempting to claim that the Palenstine freedom fighers (ie I call them terrorists) taking Israel soldiers captive by kidnapping is a justifable act?



Pulling out of Gaza: You mean pulling out of a city with no buildings not raised?
Dismantling settlements: In places where it'd cost more to keep than leave?


The Palenstine authority got exactly what it asked for - the land. The buildings were built by Israel were they not?



I guess giving them what they want would be the best option. If all captives (That are captived with no right at all, or if you want to discard all that crap: WAR) are freed, there will be no motive for Lebanese or Palestinieans to wage war. And if there would be some extremist groups, they wouldn't receive any support.

Captives are not the motivation for the violence done by Palenstine Terror organizations.



You said it: Soldiers. Not civilians, and I think that covers it.


Kidnapping soldiers is an act of war - guess what Israel responded with?

answer: an act of war




Last time I discussed the term "Terrorists" in the ORG, I got answered that it refers to those who terrorize and kill civilians. Now, just as I said before: How can you rank Hesbullah as a "terrorist" when he does neither of both?


Hezbullah attacks with missles into civilian areas. Hezbullah supplies weapons to Palenstine terrorists. Etc etc etc.




Those kidnappings are justified, as they are for enemy soldiers, and the enemy have a LOT more already "kidnapped".


Then you must agree that a military response by Israel is also justfied since enemy soldiers (terrorists) attacked an Israeli outpost to kidnap those same soldiers. An act of war.



I think if you are so biased, you shouldn't even try to argue.

If the shoe fits - maybe you should also wear it.

[Kommodus]

Ok, I normally support Isreal, but the current turn of events seems bewildering. There are a host of problems with Isreal launching large-scale invasions of Gaza and especially Lebanon. This escalation of the conflict far exceeds Isreal's normal response to attacks, and is a huge setback to whatever remnants of the peace process remained.

I understand Isreal's desire to retrieve its kidnapped soldiers. But these invasions are throwing the fledgling Palestinian state and Lebanon into chaos, and I fear the terrorist factions will capitalize. Progress made toward establishing a viable, stable Palestinian state is being destroyed - it will take years to rebuild the damaged infrastructure. Will it always be this way - one step forward and three steps back? :wall:

I don't really know how Isreal should respond, and I don't want to argue about it - I'm just sick of this entire headache. :shame:

[x-dANGEr]

Redleg, through that post, I get it that you are a 10 years old kid who just knew what Palestine is? Nothing personal mate, but half of what you posted is wrong & manipulating. (Hmm.. Since it is manipulating, maybe older)


Yes indeed x-danger read the word nine. Since Israel's withdraw from the Gaza Strip 300 missiles have been fired into Israel. In other words for the last nine monthes violence has been occuring by both sides.
Don't just hijack an arguement and start arguing things not there.. I said no way Hamas/Kassam would lunch 100 missiles a month (Which was posted by some member), so you are simply prooving my point, thank you. (This prooves that you're just arguing for the heck of it.. Stick to a point and back it up)


The Palenstine Terrorist groups such as Hezbelloh and Hamas do not want peace with Israel only its destruction. Hesbullah isn't Palestinian, which leads us to reason number 2 of believing you know nothing.. Hmm also, you mean that "The Palestinian Terrorist groups as Husbullah and Hamas do not want peace with the terrorist group Israel, only its destruction", don't you? Since you say:


Both sides are equally at fault in the violence. Remember it takes two to have a fight.


And:

Lebanon might want to review its policies about Hezbelloh if it does not want another nation to remove a criminal element that strikes across into their border. It does not make what Israel is doing right - but it does make it understandable. When the police of the nation refuse to address the criminal element eventual someone else will.
Already said it.. Hesubullah attacked Israeli soldiers, if Israel is to attack Hesbullah soldiers, then it'd be protecting it self, not by killing everyone in front.

Palenstine prisoners captured by Israel for doing criminal acts are not capitives. People taken without criminal charges are indeed captives. So are you attempting to claim that the Palenstine freedom fighers (ie I call them terrorists) taking Israel soldiers captive by kidnapping is a justifable act?

You now 100% proove you're a rookie to the whole matter (Reason number 3): What is the percent of the prisoners held by Israel are held there for "justice" do you think? I can tell you, it exceeds not 10%, and I'm not talking about the Palestinian ones only, a lot of Lebanese from the south were captived after those masscarces.. And yes, I'm saying that if Israel is keeping all these 'captives' with no hope of freeing them, something must be done to free them.


The Palenstine authority got exactly what it asked for - the land. The buildings were built by Israel were they not?

Not.

Captives are not the motivation for the violence done by Palenstine Terror organizations.
Oh, I forgot you're the head of Hamas.. Evidence? Because in each ex speech, the goal was clearly stated "captives". Btw: The topic is about Hesbullah, Lebanon and Israel BTW.. I guess you have something against Palestine, and Palestinians as a whole since you keep getting them between your nails, with un-evident cruel words.


Kidnapping soldiers is an act of war - guess what Israel responded with?
Let's say it this way: Israel holding captives is an act of war, guess what Hesbullah responded with?


Hezbullah attacks with missles into civilian areas. Hezbullah supplies weapons to Palenstine terrorists. Etc etc etc.

Reason N.4 making me believe you're a rookie to whole this.. :

Hesbullah never started an attack on civilian areas.. This incident is another proof: He carried an attack on some soldiers, Israel responded with attacks into civilian areas, and so Hesbullah's attacks developed and kept up with that level.


Then you must agree that a military response by Israel is also justfied since enemy soldiers (terrorists) attacked an Israeli outpost to kidnap those same soldiers. An act of war.
Yea I do, but not on CIVILIANS!

If the shoe fits - maybe you should also wear it.
I actually look at you when I read this..

Oh.. One last note: Since both Israelis, Palestinians and Hesbullah are in the same fault, why do you keep calling the last two terrorists and the first not?

[Redleg]

Redleg, through that post, I get it that you are a 10 years old kid who just knew what Palestine is? Nothing personal mate, but half of what you posted is wrong & manipulating. (Hmm.. Since it is manipulating, maybe older)

Your wrong on so many accounts it is rather amusing to read.



Don't just hijack an arguement and start arguing things not there.. I said no way Hamas/Kassam would lunch 100 missiles a month (Which was posted by some member), so you are simply prooving my point, thank you. (This prooves that you're just arguing for the heck of it.. Stick to a point and back it up)

The point again you missed - 300 missiles have been fired in the last 9 monthes. VIolence is indeed being done by the Palenstine terror groups. Hezbollah and Hamas.

Hezbollah is supporting the Palenstine terror organization Hamas with its current operations. Israel was not in Lebanon prior to the kidnapping now was it?

Maybe you should also learn to read english a little better. I proved both of you were incorrect. Nine monthes of violence with 300 missiles being launched. This equates to 30 missiles a month - which means the production rate of missiles is greater then you alledged but less then what the other individual stated.



Hesbullah isn't Palestinian, which leads us to reason number 2 of believing you know nothing.. Hmm also, you mean that "The Palestinian Terrorist groups as Husbullah and Hamas do not want peace with the terrorist group Israel, only its destruction", don't you? Since you say:


Try reading again did I claim Hezbollah is a Palenstine terrorist group or did I stated Palenstine Terrorist groups. Next time for the poor english skills you demonstrated from your failure to read (and my lazy typing) - I will clearly label Hamas as a Palenstine Terror group and Hezbollah as an Islamic Arab Terror Groupd with Links to a terrorist state sponsor Iran. Guess where Hezbollah is attempting to send the two Israeli soldiers they kidnapped?

I happen to know who and what Hezbollah is - founded with the help of Iran during the Lebanon civil war of period (1980). Are you attempting to deny that the Islamic Arab group that is a political party and a terror organization known as Hezbollah is not supporting Hamas in its avowed destruction of Israel?





And:
Already said it.. Hesubullah attacked Israeli soldiers, if Israel is to attack Hesbullah soldiers, then it'd be protecting it self, not by killing everyone in front.

Then you must understand that an act of war often necessates another act of war. Hezbollah had no justification to kidnap Israeli soldiers that were on the Israeli side of the border. You might want to think before you go defending a terrorist act or an aggressive act of war committed by Hezbollah.
(depending on how you view Hezbollah)



You now 100% proove you're a rookie to the whole matter (Reason number 3): What is the percent of the prisoners held by Israel are held there for "justice" do you think? I can tell you, it exceeds not 10%, and I'm not talking about the Palestinian ones only, a lot of Lebanese from the south were captived after those masscarces.. And yes, I'm saying that if Israel is keeping all these 'captives' with no hope of freeing them, something must be done to free them.

Try again.

Here I will help you understand the simple english that you failed to read.. Are you blindly baised in your support of terror organizations that you failed to catch the actual meaning of the statement?

Palenstine prisoners captured by Israel for doing criminal acts are not capitives.

This part you got correct. Indeed some prisoners are indeed criminals caught in the act and have been charged of a crime.

People taken without criminal charges are indeed captives.

Oh look you failed to catch this part of the paragraph - You might want to check out your own failures to read because of your own baised views before accusing others of ignorance.


So are you attempting to claim that the Palenstine freedom fighers (ie I call them terrorists) taking Israel soldiers captive by kidnapping is a justifable act?

Now that is simply a question, are you supporting the use of terror to attempt to free those captives? What has the average Israeli citizen done to deserve such an attack by Hamas or yes even Hezbollah who does indeed launch missiles into Israel from the border?




Not.


Your proof?




Oh, I forgot you're the head of Hamas..

I forgot your a blind supporter of Hamas and its terror tactics (I to can play this game. Must be your age and your own ignorance of the issues that causes you to miss critical parts of the statement. Care to play some more?)



Evidence? Because in each ex speech, the goal was clearly stated "captives". Btw: The topic is about Hesbullah, Lebanon and Israel BTW.. I guess you have something against Palestine, and Palestinians as a whole since you keep getting them between your nails, with un-evident cruel words.


Hezbollah is supporting Hamas - you might want to check out the number of weapons being smuggled to Hamas by Hezbollah. That and the missile technology..... Hezbollah has been linked to several terrorist attacks with Palenstine groups against Israel from Wikipedia



Hezbollah activities in the al-Aqsa Intifada
Main article: al-Aqsa Intifada

Recruits being sworn in - Beirut, November 11, 2001In December 2001 three Hezbollah operatives were caught in Jordan while attempting to bring in BM-13 Katyusha rockets into the West Bank. Syed Hassan Nasrallah secretary general of Hezbollah, responded that "It is every freedom loving peoples right and duty against occupation to send arms to Palestinians from any possible place."[29]

During 2002, 2003 and 2004, the Israeli Security Forces thwarted numerous suicide bombing attacks, some of which Israel claims were planned and funded by Hezbollah and were to have been carried out by Tanzim (Fatah's armed wing) activists. Israeli officials accused Hezbollah of aiding Palestinian terrorism and participating in weapon smuggling (see also: Santorini, Karin A).

On June 16, 2004, two Palestinian girls — aged 14 and 15 — were arrested by the Israeli Defense Forces for plotting a suicide bombing. [30] According to an IDF statement, the two minors were recruited by Tanzim activists. [31] On June 23, 2004, another allegedly Hezbollah-funded suicide bombing attack was foiled by the Israeli security forces. [32].

In February 2005 the Palestinian Authority accused Hezbollah of attempting to derail the truce signed with Israel. Palestinian officials and former militants described how Hezbollah promised an increase in funding for any occupation resistance group able to carry out an attack on Israeli military targets [33]. Since the May 2000 Israeli withdrawal, Hezbollah has continued fighting the IDF around the disputed 10 km²-Shebaa Farms area on the Lebanese-Syrian border. Although the UN regards Shebaa Farms — 14 farms on the western slope of Mount Hermon, near the village of Shebaa — as Syrian territory, The Lebanese government and Hezbollah considers the area a part of Lebanon. The Shebaa farms were taken by Israel from Syria during the 1967 war. Syria was asked to notify the UN that it considered the Shebaa farms to be part of Lebanon, but no official statement was ever sent. Some argue that Hezbollah is being used by Syria and Iran as a proxy against Israel. [34]



I don't support neither Israel or the Palenstine terror groups. I find both at fault. The terror groups I find slightly more at fault because the cowards attack civilians and use kids to carryout the attacks. I wonder if you support the using of teenage children to carry out sucide bombings? (again do you care to play this type of game?)



Let's say it this way: Israel holding captives is an act of war, guess what Hesbullah responded with?



Are you attempting to state Israel has not honored the peace that was negotated back in 1995 and completed in 2000 with Hezbollah?



After years of cross-border attacks from Lebanon into Israel, by Palestinian militants, Israel invaded southern Lebanon in 1982. The stated goal of the operation was an attempt to evict the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and other militant groups, but Israel remained in southern Lebanon for the next 18 years. After UN resolution 1995, Israel withdrew in the spring of 2000, under the Prime Minister Ehud Barak, a former Chief of Staff who had actually in that position personally ruled over the security zone. The UN confirmed that Israel complied with all the requirements in SC resolution 1995. Since this time, the militant group Hezbollah set up bases of operation in the area in contradiction to the UN SC resolution 1995 which required the Lebanese government to dismantle any armed militias operating in the area. Hezbollah and the Lebanese government cited the constant violation of Lebanese air space by Israeli planes, and the occupation of Shebaa Farms, a territory which they consider Lebanese, but which is not considered as such according to international law.

I would state that both sides are violating the agreement.

Are you also attempting to claim the missile attacks into civilian areas that were used as a diversion to kidnap the soldiers is also justified?





Reason N.4 making me believe you're a rookie to whole this.. :

Hesbullah never started an attack on civilian areas.. This incident is another proof: He carried an attack on some soldiers, Israel responded with attacks into civilian areas, and so Hesbullah's attacks developed and kept up with that level.

Care to explain this particlur quote from several news articles - you can also find it at Wikipedia to make it simple for you.


Besides the initial raid, Hezbollah guerrillas targeted several Israeli towns with Katyusha rockets. There were numerous civilian casualties including a 40 year old woman who was killed in Nahariya and a 70 year old woman was killed in Safed. Hezbollah has threatened to hit Haifa. [24]

Careful now - Hezbollah is not the organization that you believe it to be. It is a terror organization that uses strikes against civilians also. It seems Hezbollah own actions belie your claim here.



Yea I do, but not on CIVILIANS!

See above



I actually look at you when I read this..

You might want to look in the mirror.



Oh.. One last note: Since both Israelis, Palestinians and Hesbullah are in the same fault, why do you keep calling the last two terrorists and the first not?

Israel I find at fault many times - you might want to go back and read earlier threads about this issue. It seems though you confuse my critizism of Hamas and Hezbollah as blind support of Israel. It would serve you better to actually read what is written versus assume things not in evidence.

This reminds me of a previous discussion on Israel and Palenstine.


You know the one where you attempted the same type of arguement and then left when your points were over and over again disproved and shown to be false with facts? Don't attempt such an arguement when the facts demonstrate that both sides are continually at fault and both violate the peace over and over again. If its not an Palenstine Terrorist extremist violating the peace - its a Jewish Israeli extremists that commits a terror act to jump start the violence again. I find your blind support of the Palenstine cause amusing when you negate yourself to emotional appeal and attempting to claim others are ignorant when all one has to look into the actual facts to show how baised your presentation is. Calling me a rookie and ignorant of the facts is rather amusing when it only takes a few minutes of research on the web to find nuetral articles that prove your information completely inaccurate or false. Now careful x-danger you have shown your rear-end so far in this thread - I don't think you want to continue with such a course of action now do you? Because I can easily oblige you with a tit for tat discussion.

[Dâriûsh]

I'll wager ten camels that Hizbullah will invoke the Sabra and Shatila card. Any takers?

[Redleg]

I'll wager ten camels that Hizbullah will invoke the Sabra and Shatila card. Any takers?

Well that arguement has been implied alreadly in this thread by someone....

It won't surprise me to see Hezbollah actually state that in the very near future. Probably as they attempt to send the two Israeli captives outside of Lebanon. But what the hell, the talks in Eygpt might pan out and prove us both wrong.

[x-dANGEr]

Maybe you should also learn to read english a little better. I proved both of you were incorrect. Nine monthes of violence with 300 missiles being launched. This equates to 30 missiles a month - which means the production rate of missiles is greater then you alledged but less then what the other individual stated.

Just a little note.. Not everything in the whole world revolves around you, I wasn't addressing you when I quoted your pessage..

Try reading again did I claim Hezbollah is a Palenstine terrorist group or did I stated Palenstine Terrorist groups. Next time for the poor english skills you demonstrated from your failure to read (and my lazy typing) - I will clearly label Hamas as a Palenstine Terror group and Hezbollah as an Islamic Arab Terror Groupd with Links to a terrorist state sponsor Iran. Guess where Hezbollah is attempting to send the two Israeli soldiers they kidnapped?
You actually claimed that Hesbullah is a Palestinian terrorist group, or that is what would a sane person get from this:

The Palenstine Terrorist groups such as Hezbelloh and Hamas do not want peace with Israel only its destruction.

Then you must understand that an act of war often necessates another act of war. Hezbollah had no justification to kidnap Israeli soldiers that were on the Israeli side of the border. You might want to think before you go defending a terrorist act or an aggressive act of war committed by Hezbollah.
(depending on how you view Hezbollah)
Then, Israel has no justification to keep the captives captived.

Are you attempting to state Israel has not honored the peace that was negotated back in 1995 and completed in 2000 with Hezbollah?
Well, I do think that 'conditions' of that peace was to set free the prisoners, and that hasn't been done, even once in the whole Israeli history without a trade.

Are you also attempting to claim the missile attacks into civilian areas that were used as a diversion to kidnap the soldiers is also justified?

I have no info of such attacks.

Care to explain this particlur quote from several news articles - you can also find it at Wikipedia to make it simple for you.


I'm not going to start exhanging childish comments with you, such as "look in the mirror" bla bla bla..

I stopped the arguement last time, because I'd ask you what's the color of that dog, you'd say it's a cat.


That quote in no way implies that all that happened at once. Yes, he did attack cities, but only after Israel started their millitary actions. And to try and simplify things for you: If you were a Lebanese, you want the captives back, Israel offers a stance of 'no way' to you, what would you do to free them? You asked the help of the community, but you keep getting forgotten through the numerous tragedies in the world, what would you do again?



Israel I find at fault many times - you might want to go back and read earlier threads about this issue. It seems though you confuse my critizism of Hamas and Hezbollah as blind support of Israel. It would serve you better to actually read what is written versus assume things not in evidence.
AGAIN! I ask you a question, you forget about it, and say that I say things I haven't actually said. My question was clearly stated:

Since both Israelis, Palestinians and Hesbullah are in the same fault, why do you keep calling the last two terrorists and the first not?

If you look at your post, you'd see that you always made sure to mention "terrorist" concerning Hesbullah and Hamas, but forgot about it when it comes to Israel, even though you say that you think they are at the same fault.

[yesdachi]

Just because Israel shares “fault” doesn’t mean they are terrorists. :freak:

[Dâriûsh]

Just because Israel shares “fault” doesn’t mean they are terrorists. :freak:

I bet a lot of the Lebanese civilians killed in Israeli bombardments would disagree if they could.

[Big_John]

I bet a lot of the Lebanese civilians killed in Israeli bombardments would disagree if they could.i'm sure there are some still living (though sans limbs at this point) that would agree too.

[Dâriûsh]

As for Zionist conspiracy theories, is this whole thing staged to distract attention from President Katsav’s sex scandal? Stay tuned on Al-Manar.

[yesdachi]

Collateral damage from a military attack is not terrorism.

[Dâriûsh]

Collateral damage from a military attack is not terrorism. Oh? okay. :juggle2:

[Redleg]

Just a little note.. Not everything in the whole world revolves around you, I wasn't addressing you when I quoted your pessage.


When one starts his post with an ad hominem arguement against another person certain statements by individuals will be taken the wrong way, maybe you should specify who you are directing comments to when you start out quoting one individual and go on to another. You might want to take your own statement in account, since you begain your post quoting me and then continued with your argument directed at my comments..

It seems your again making assumptions.

And It seems you still fail..



You actually claimed that Hesbullah is a Palestinian terrorist group, or that is what would a sane person get from this:

Like I stated must be my poor typing skills and your poor english reading skills - time to move on....or would you like to continue to play?




Then, Israel has no justification to keep the captives captived.


Never claimed they did now did I. Are you still of the opinion that the attacks on civilians are justified because Israel keeps some captives? Your argument is based upon moral relativity and emotional appeal. That one party is doing a wrong does not make the other parties actions right.



Well, I do think that 'conditions' of that peace was to set free the prisoners, and that hasn't been done, even once in the whole Israeli history without a trade.

Care to place a wager on that. If my faultly memory serves me correctly - Israel in the past has released captives.


http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B05E6DD1538F93AA25754C0A963948260


On July 3 Israel freed 300 prisoners from Atlit and drove them over the border into Lebanon.

Although the release came three days after Shiite militiamen freed 39 American hostages from a hijacked Trans World Airlines jetliner in Beirut, Israel said the release was not linked in any way to the hijackers' demand that Israel release its Lebanese prisoners.



Its old data - but it kinds of defeats your arguement here now doesn't.





I have no info of such attacks.


Hm that kind of defeats your arguement about me being a rookie.... Next time you might want to research nuetral web sites before making certain claims.



I'm not going to start exhanging childish comments with you, such as "look in the mirror" bla bla bla..

Your learning now... Maybe you shouldn't start with them either.



I stopped the arguement last time, because I'd ask you what's the color of that dog, you'd say it's a cat.


Again incorrect - you left when the facts were going against your arguement, and it wasn't just me in that thread that was pointing out the errors in your arguement. Just like several instances in this thread alreadly.



That quote in way implies that all that happened at once. Yes, he did attack cities, but only after Israel started their millitary actions. And to try and simplify things for you: If you were a Lebanese, you want the captives back, Israel offers a stance of 'no way' to you, what would you do to free them? You asked the help of the community, but you keep getting forgotten through the numerous tragedies in the world, what would you do again?


The quote clearly states that civilians were attack before the kidnapping as a diversion to the soldiers being kidnapped. This would indicate to any sane individual that Hezbollah started the action.

That Hezbollah is attacking Israeli cities with missiles after Israel's attack is the implication you wish it to imply - but it does not. it clearly states the implications of the diversionary attack in the complete article. You might want to do a little web research.

I could provide you the Wikipedia source - but since I am at work now it willhave to wait... But regardless - your statement here is incorrect - it did not imply it stated it, and it verifies that within the article itself. A little research will pay you wonders in dividends about the situation - versus poor attempts at calling someone a rookie - when you do not have the facts to support your own position. Emotional appeal arguements often fail when faced with facts.

If I was Lebanese I wouldn't be attacking into Israel with anything. If I was Lebanese I would be removing Hezabollah from the southern border camps to prevent their engaging across the border with Israel. In other words I would be attempting to honor the accords of the peace treaty that I agreed to.

Now if I was an Islamic Terrorist I would be doing exactly what Hezbollah is doing now - using terror tactics to attempt to cause the changes I want. However it seems to backfired on them now doesn't?

So doyou support the Hezbollah terror wing and the Hamas Terror wing in the conduction of terror attacks on civilians?



AGAIN! I ask you a question, you forget about it, and say that I say things I haven't actually said. My question was clearly stated:

You asked a question you got an answer - I am under no obligation to give you the answer you want, only the answer that I believe.




Since both Israelis, Palestinians and Hesbullah are in the same fault, why do you keep calling the last two terrorists and the first not?

If you look at your post, you'd see that you always made sure to mention "terrorist" concerning Hesbullah and Hamas, but forgot about it when it comes to Israel, even though you say that you think they are at the same fault.

One is a state the other two are know terrorist organizations - the answer is self evident to anyone who is not an avert terrorist supporter... Finding fault with a nation is more then enough - Hamas and Hezbollah are known terrorist organizations, care to guess how many nations have those two organizations on their terrorist watch lists. Care to play sematics with me - I am more then game..

It seems your still having a problem understanding the difference from a nation that uses terror tactics against terrorist organizations and terrorist organizations - both are equally at fault. But ask yourself this question when was the last time Israel sent a child into a bus with a bomb strapped to their chest to become a matyr to God......


So far -

Redleg -1 for writing Palenstine Terror Organizations Hezballoh and Hamas.
X-Danger -3 - no knowledge of missile attacks into civilian cities as a diversion, no knowledge of previous prisoner releases by Israel, and for claiming that Hezbollah has never attacked civilian areas.

Oh the aspects of being called a rookie by someone who will not read neutral papers from multiple sources about anything in the Middle-East.


I have become rather amused with your attempts here.. :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

[Beirut]

Hmm, seems Redleg and X-dANGEr have taken up where Gawain and I left off. I wonder if George and Martha will show up as well?

[Redleg]

Hmm, seems Redleg and X-dANGEr have taken up where Gawain and I left off. I wonder if George and Martha will show up as well?

THere is a major difference though - I don't defend Israel actions. I am simply calling a bunch of thugs a bunch of thugs.

IIf you can't tell the difference Beriut - maybe you should bring George and Martha into the scene - they sometimes demonstrate more common sense on the issue then you yourself do.

[Red Peasant]

Those kidnappings are justified, as they are for enemy soldiers.




That is true, but now the Palestinians and Hezbullah have to accept that they have declared an overt state of 'war' by such acts and accept the consequences. You never know, you might just win a stand-up fight with Israel. Though I doubt it. Sneak attacks, suicide bombs and kidnappings are about the limit I think. Your best chance is to draw Israeli forces into heavily urbanised areas, but do you want to endanger your civilians to such an extent?

[Reenk Roink]

Collateral damage from a military attack is not terrorism.

Not in my paradigm...

Yeah, it's not on par with suicide bombing nightclubs, but you ever hear of "terrorism from above"?

[Beirut]

THere is a major difference though - I don't defend Israel actions. I am simply calling a bunch of thugs a bunch of thugs.

IIf you can't tell the difference Beriut - maybe you should bring George and Martha into the scene - they sometimes demonstrate more common sense on the issue then you yourself do.

Well! Hello to you too.

One friendly post remarking that the debate continues and there's already hostility. Back to the Frontroom.

[Redleg]

Well! Hello to you too.

One friendly post remarking that the debate continues and there's already hostility. Back to the Frontroom.

Then I must apologize because I read it as a snide remark - not a friendly post.

[Big_John]

Then I must apologize because I read it as a snide remark - not a friendly post.perchance you need to get out of the backroom a bit? :wink:


(Beirut, what innocence! you must include all appropriate smilies in any non-attack post in the backroom, mang!)

[Redleg]

perchance you need to get out of the backroom a bit? :wink:


What and disappoint my fans.......


I have at least restricted my time in the backroom to primarily when I am at work......:help:

When I get home I will have to play the game "Destroy all Humans" if I can just get past the Duck and Cover mission..... Then I can finish destroying all of humanity........:oops:

[Husar]

Your best chance is to draw Israeli forces into heavily urbanised areas, but do you want to endanger your civilians to such an extent?
If you have no problem sending your own children as suicide bombers, I´d think the answer to your question is rather easy...
Hmm, now i think that calling someone who sends his own people as suicide bombers a freedom fighter is somewhat absurd, because he fights for freedom of his people on earth and those bombers will never experience that.

And I don´t like to read those comments about "collateral damage", calling real people "collateral damage" smells like monkeysphere.
Always think about your own neighbors or family being part of that "collateral damage" and how you would feel about it then.
Same goes for Israelis being blown up by rockets and bombs for the faults of their government. Not to mention killing people for someone who is imprisoned is disgusting and doesn´t help the Palestinians in any way.
On the other side, Palestine imprisoned one soldier and got invaded for that, now Hisbollah took two soldiers hostage and expected what? A nice letter demanding them back?

I think Hisbollah are indirectly responsible for the dead Lebanese people because they provoked this attack. It´s still Israel´s fault because they pull the trigger, but Hisbollah should´ve known what would happen and simply not attacked Israel. Same goes for the Palestinians, if they do nothing(but using diplomacy) and will still be invaded, they`ll have my support.

[Beirut]

Then I must apologize because I read it as a snide remark - not a friendly post.

Not at all. Not at all. :bow:

Merely remarking that as the years and members go by, the issue remains on the emotional front burner.

[econ21]

It's hard to think the Middle East could get any more depressing, but it just seems to have done.

It's kind of ironic that some hope should have been created by Syria pulling out of Lebanon and Israel out of Gaza. And then we get this - terrorists from these "liberated" areas (freedom fighters, whatever you want to call them) kidnapping Israeli soldiers ostensibly to use as bargaining chips. In reality I suspect it is just to provoke an Israeli reaction since escalating the conflict will strengthen the position of the hardliners (and yes, I suspect Israel is playing right into their hands).

Now terrorism often happens despite the best efforts of the authorities - in New York, Iraq, Madrid, London etc. But what is salient about these events is that both the Palestinian and Lebanese authorities seem to be openly colluding in the kidnappings. Hamas is the elected Palestinian governments and its attempts to distance its political wing from its military wing are even more laughable than those of Sinn Fein/IRA during Ireland's recent troubles. From a Lebanese professor on the BBC, I gather the Lebanese government supports the Hizbollah actions against Israel (as she did).

Now, I confess I am not very well informed about the Middle East. I am certainly no pro-Israeli hawk - my gut instinct is that they should get out of all the occupied territories, smash their stupid wall and share Jerusalem. But it does seem a bizarre state of affairs when one state (actually two states) condone such actions against a neighbour being undertaken from their territory. I find all the "War against Terror" rhetoric of my own country (and of the US) inappropriate when applied to stateless and elusive networks like Al Qaida. But in the case of Israel, it is hard to see these kidnappings (and the rocket attacks, and the suicide bombings etc) backed by their neighbours as anything other than acts of war.

But what makes the thing particularly depressing, beyond the carnage and loss of life that is going on, is that it seems all so pointless. The welfare of the Palestinians and the Lebanese, already devastated by past conflict, is being brought to a new low by the destruction of power stations, airports, withdrawals of aid, trade sanctions and blockades etc. Their governments seem to be conspiring in a course of events that will further impoverish and immiserate their own people. You do not secure life, liberty and pursuit of happiness by attacking or blackmailing your neighbour. Siezing some more pieces of land off Israel won't make them rich, still less will trying to drive Israel into the sea. They should look at Singapore, South Korea, Botswana, Mauritius, heck even China and India now to see how a people can develop - and it is through peaceful hard work, not fighting for land. They should put aside their petty hatreds and grievances, and get on with living constructive lives and providing for their children, not training them for death.

And the real kicker is that there is no real suggestion that the Lebanese and Palestinian governments, by colluding in attacks on Israel, are doing anything other than what the majority of their own people want. If ever there was an example of the folly of man, this would surely be it.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I have been educated in conflict management and have served as a mediator at the lower court level. The Middle East leaves me shaking my head.

I turn more and more to the conclusion that the world is doing a disservice by crying out against the bloodshed. I fear that the only long-term solution is for all of the parties to engage in all out war, killing one another in the millions. Once all sides are bled white and no one is left who does not mourn some loved one then maybe they will decide to sit down at a table, talk through a few points, and then live up to them.

We outside of the Middle East cannot bring them to that table (we don't have to live with the solutions, so our efforts appear condescending) many of those who are a part of the Middle East cannot settle for the solutions that have been proffered when they feel in their hearts that full victory is at hand if only enough of their companions will fight.

I fear that all of our external efforts -- however noble (and I think most were noble in intent even when short-sighted and arrogant) -- do nothing but prolong the agony. One of the saddest lessons of conflict management is that sometimes there is no way to avoid the conflict....it must be fought.

And may God/Allah/Yahweh have mercy on their souls.



postscrip #1: One poster suggested that it takes two to fight. This is incorrect. Conflict can be very unilateral, it is stopping it that requires multiple efforts.

postscrip #2: The posters suggesting that "collateral damage" -- that is, to label it properly, the killing and maiming of uninvolved parties by happenstance -- is a form of terrorism do a dis-service to humanity. If they are correct, then all war is terrorism, and by extension any form of violence to anyone and at any time may be justified for "the cause." Do you really think the world will grow safer if any accidental killing is considered terrorism? Or have you not developed an opinion more complex than "violence is bad...."

[Pannonian]

I have been educated in conflict management and have served as a mediator at the lower court level. The Middle East leaves me shaking my head.

I turn more and more to the conclusion that the world is doing a disservice by crying out against the bloodshed. I fear that the only long-term solution is for all of the parties to engage in all out war, killing one another in the millions. Once all sides are bled white and no one is left who does not mourn some loved one then maybe they will decide to sit down at a table, talk through a few points, and then live up to them.

We outside of the Middle East cannot bring them to that table (we don't have to live with the solutions, so our efforts appear condescending) many of those who are a part of the Middle East cannot settle for the solutions that have been proffered when they feel in their hearts that full victory is at hand if only enough of their companions will fight.

I fear that all of our external efforts -- however noble (and I think most were noble in intent even when short-sighted and arrogant) -- do nothing but prolong the agony. One of the saddest lessons of conflict management is that sometimes there is no way to avoid the conflict....it must be fought.

And may God/Allah/Yahweh have mercy on their souls.

I agree with you that both sides are obviously keen to fight, and in such cases, nothing can be done to stop them from fighting.

My preferred solution is to seal the area off. No-one from either Israel nor Palestine allowed to set foot in Europe. If anyone currently in Europe sets foot in that area, their EU citizenship to be stripped and not allowed back in. No trade, no aid. If they want to kill each other, let them do so, but do not get us involved, it's none of our business. We gave up the idea of empire 50 years ago when we were kicked out, so don't try and attach any blame to us for something that has been beyond our control for over half a century. No-one wants to listen to us, so I don't see why we should continue to offer advice.

[Papewaio]

OT Postscipt # 2

If you keep extrapolating it you end up with doctors being terrorists if someone accidentally dies under the knife.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

OT Postscipt # 2

If you keep extrapolating it you end up with doctors being terrorists if someone accidentally dies under the knife.

Well put. You extend my point well, and better than I did it myself.

Gaads...


Now I'll have to re-think my Paul-Hogan influenced view of Australians....

:laugh4: :2thumbsup:

[Quietus]

Ok, I normally support Isreal, but the current turn of events seems bewildering. There are a host of problems with Isreal launching large-scale invasions of Gaza and especially Lebanon. This escalation of the conflict far exceeds Isreal's normal response to attacks, and is a huge setback to whatever remnants of the peace process remained.

I understand Isreal's desire to retrieve its kidnapped soldiers. But these invasions are throwing the fledgling Palestinian state and Lebanon into chaos, and I fear the terrorist factions will capitalize. Progress made toward establishing a viable, stable Palestinian state is being destroyed - it will take years to rebuild the damaged infrastructure. Will it always be this way - one step forward and three steps back? :wall:

I don't really know how Isreal should respond, and I don't want to argue about it - I'm just sick of this entire headache. :shame:
I remember AdrianII's assessment of Olmert months ago (when Sharon had a stroke), that's he's a hardliner. Adrian's correct.

For 1 kidnapped soldier, there's over 60 Palestinians dead.
For 2 kidnapped and 8 dead, there's 55 dead in just a couple of days.

:skull:

Bush already warned not to push the anti-Syrian Government too far. After the US vetoes the UN condemning the Gaza operations, Israel should at least scale back....

[Redleg]

Bush already warned not to push the anti-Syrian Government too far. After the US vetoes the UN condemning the Gaza operations, Israel should at least scale back....

I would like the Security Council to inform Israel that they must pull out of Lebanon - and the United States abstain from the vote to send a message to Israel.....

[PanzerJaeger]

I would like the Security Council to inform Israel that they must pull out of Lebanon - and the United States abstain from the vote to send a message to Israel.....

That would be rather hypocritical of the US, considering the operation in Afghanistan.

No, this is a time to stand with our ally against islamic terrorism and the nations that support it.

[spmetla]

Yes, if Israel could pull out now I think it's point would be proven, if the stay and occupy all of Lebanon then they have definately gone overboard.

Problem I forsee though is now that the situation is escalated even if the Israelis withdraw Hezbollah will undoubtably continue attacking the Israelis in Israel.

Does anyone besides me think this has to do with the Israeli Airforce flying jets over Syria when the moved into Gaza? Seeing as Lebanon is a Syrian puppet and Hezbollah is supplied and trained by the Syrians don't you think that Syria was trying to retaliate against Israel without having to put themselves on the line. Don't think they expected such a heavy handed response though but with the precedent set with the first kidnapping it really shouldn't have been such a surprise.

As Redleg suggested I hope as well the US doesn't use it's veto power to protect the Israelis. Would definately help the US image in the world and let the Israelis know they need to know their limits as well.

And Panzerjaeger, I don't think this would be hypocritical. If the US were to condemn the actions of Israel and vote against Israel it would be hypocritical but by not voting it makes a point of don't push it. No need to push the Syrians and possibly the Egyptians to all out war with Israel again.

[Keba]

That would be rather hypocritical of the US, considering the operation in Afghanistan.

How does Afghanistan come into this or even remotely relate to the present situation? Afganistan had the full support of the international community (or, at least, everyone that mattered), was targeted not only by US forces, but forces from a large number of countries (again, with a large number of those countries staunchly opposing the war in Iraq).

So, Afghanistan was an internationally supported attack. Libanon is not, if anything, there are similarities to Iraq, with one difference: at least Israel has proof that there is something going on over there.

The US won't abstain, it will veto ... and send it's relations with a number of other coutnries into the nether regions.

[ChewieTobbacca]

The worst thing that can happen now is that the typically pro-U.S. Lebanese government gets overtaken by anti-U.S. due to association w/ Israel sentiment. Then Israel might just have played into their enemies hands and made more anti-Israeli and anti-U.S. governments. We should all be glad though that diplomacy between Israel and Egypt and Jordan have kept those two out of the fray. Nothing would be worse than them jumping in with the new arms we've given them now. No longer are they using Soviet equipment but American tanks and planes.

[Mount Suribachi]

Shiny new toys from the US are nice, but its how you use them that counts.

Furthermore, Eygpt breaks its peace deal with Egypt, they lose all support from the US, and IIRC, they are the 2nd largest recipient of US aid (after Israel).

[ChewieTobbacca]

Exactly why we should be glad dealing did work in this case. It has made things a bit easier indeed.

[x-dANGEr]

Collateral damage from a military attack is not terrorism.Define terrorism.

When one starts his post with an ad hominem arguement against another person certain statements by individuals will be taken the wrong way, maybe you should specify who you are directing comments to when you start out quoting one individual and go on to another. You might want to take your own statement in account, since you begain your post quoting me and then continued with your argument directed at my comments..

It seems your again making assumptions.

And It seems you still fail..

I was using your link to evident what I said.

..And, maybe you should blame your understanding skills rather than my outstanding english ones ~;)

Like I stated must be my poor typing skills and your poor english reading skills - time to move on....or would you like to continue to play?

No, not my poor english skills, move on.

Never claimed they did now did I. Are you still of the opinion that the attacks on civilians are justified because Israel keeps some captives? Your argument is based upon moral relativity and emotional appeal. That one party is doing a wrong does not make the other parties actions right.
I never implied that opinion. My opinion is that attacks on millitary are justified because Israel holds captives.


Care to place a wager on that. If my faultly memory serves me correctly - Israel in the past has released captives.

Oh right.. It wasn't a trade.. lol

Hm that kind of defeats your arguement about me being a rookie.... Next time you might want to research nuetral web sites before making certain claims.

There is no such thing as nuetral, everyone is biased, but it differs how much.

Again incorrect - you left when the facts were going against your arguement, and it wasn't just me in that thread that was pointing out the errors in your arguement. Just like several instances in this thread alreadly.
I can go back and move on from where I left it, and I have a lot yet to add. (Or repeat)

The quote clearly states that civilians were attack before the kidnapping as a diversion to the soldiers being kidnapped. This would indicate to any sane individual that Hezbollah started the action.

That Hezbollah is attacking Israeli cities with missiles after Israel's attack is the implication you wish it to imply - but it does not. it clearly states the implications of the diversionary attack in the complete article. You might want to do a little web research.

Well, Nasrullah said on the TV yesterday that they started attacking millitary targets, with the intent to capture a few soldiers and trade them for captives. "Though, Israel persuaded and invaded into Lebanon and killed civilians all the way, and so we also kept the pitch our attacks in the same level with them."

If I was Lebanese I wouldn't be attacking into Israel with anything. If I was Lebanese I would be removing Hezabollah from the southern border camps to prevent their engaging across the border with Israel. In other words I would be attempting to honor the accords of the peace treaty that I agreed to.And what about the captives?

So doyou support the Hezbollah terror wing and the Hamas Terror wing in the conduction of terror attacks on civilians?

Attacks on civilians from anyone = Not supported, I pity those who die, not get thrilled over their death.


You asked a question you got an answer - I am under no obligation to give you the answer you want, only the answer that I believe.
You've answered a question I didn't ask, bravo!

One is a state the other two are know terrorist organizations - the answer is self evident to anyone who is not an avert terrorist supporter... Finding fault with a nation is more then enough - Hamas and Hezbollah are known terrorist organizations, care to guess how many nations have those two organizations on their terrorist watch lists. Care to play sematics with me - I am more then game..
Care to explain? Or you're just saying that since a lot of countries consider them so, why shouldn't I?

But ask yourself this question when was the last time Israel sent a child into a bus with a bomb strapped to their chest to become a matyr to God......

Never. BUT, ask yourself when was the last time they did that to a Palestinian child?

no knowledge of previous prisoner releases by Israel
Not really, they did release some, but always with something in return, mostly that being people as well.

and for claiming that Hezbollah has never attacked civilian areas.

I said initiated an attack against civilians.

That is true, but now the Palestinians and Hezbullah have to accept that they have declared an overt state of 'war' by such acts and accept the consequences. You never know, you might just win a stand-up fight with Israel. Though I doubt it. Sneak attacks, suicide bombs and kidnappings are about the limit I think. Your best chance is to draw Israeli forces into heavily urbanised areas, but do you want to endanger your civilians to such an extent?

Agreed. Though, I do sometimes feel happy for those who die.. Why? Well, what did they miss? Death? Starvation? ..

If you have no problem sending your own children as suicide bombers, I´d think the answer to your question is rather easy...

You all seem to go with this "children suiciders".. Just one question: How many times did that happen?

Hmm, now i think that calling someone who sends his own people as suicide bombers a freedom fighter is somewhat absurd, because he fights for freedom of his people on earth and those bombers will never experience that.
Where comes the belief of people.. Things you can't explain because you just don't live them.

On the other side, Palestine imprisoned one soldier and got invaded for that, now Hisbollah took two soldiers hostage and expected what? A nice letter demanding them back?
Hesbullah has freed some of the captives through that way, and only that way.. So, what are you suggesting?

The one and the only possible workout is war. But we all are postponing it to what? To more death without going anywhere?

Also Redleg, the point of this argument/discussion is to try and view the other side's point, along with trying to convince as many people as possible through it of the various points through it. Just to let you know, I have nothing personal against you, or anyone else, just a lot against your ideas.

[Ironside]

From my perspective, the best course of action for Isreal is to withdraw quite soon, make a public statement of suggesting massive and active support (funding etc.) with rebuilding the destroyed infrastructure, although attacks will stop it (endure one major attack, withdraw support after the second) and state that further provocations will repeat the pattern with invasion and rebuilding.

Shouldn't take long to make the Hizbollah loosing support everytime they attack.


postscrip #2: The posters suggesting that "collateral damage" -- that is, to label it properly, the killing and maiming of uninvolved parties by happenstance -- is a form of terrorism do a dis-service to humanity. If they are correct, then all war is terrorism, and by extension any form of violence to anyone and at any time may be justified for "the cause." Do you really think the world will grow safer if any accidental killing is considered terrorism? Or have you not developed an opinion more complex than "violence is bad...."

Collateral damage is needed to be seen on case to case basis. Somehow I'm suspecting that a failed assassination attemt with airstriking, destroying a house and killing a family of 9 is going to be seen as a relation improving action (or collateral damage for that matter).
For example, it is ok to destroy the prodution-capacity in war. But not when you starts to use chemical attacks on the neighbouring cities (as dead workers doesn't work) while destroying the factories, despite it being a more efficient way of attacking (not counting side-effects).

[Pannonian]

That would be rather hypocritical of the US, considering the operation in Afghanistan.

No, this is a time to stand with our ally against islamic terrorism and the nations that support it.
I've always wondered what Israel actually does for the US to merit this unequivocal support. Britain, which has repeatedly committed troops to US ventures, gets more rebuffs (remember the furore over the F-35?). When was the last time Israel sent troops for US defence or foreign policy?

[econ21]

The one and the only possible workout is war.

To what end? Don't you think young Palestinians have better things to do with their lives than killing and being killed?

War is not a real solution here. As Seamus suggested, the only way war could "solve" anything would be by satiating the bloodlust of the warmongers.


But we all are postponing it to what? To more death without going anywhere?

Anti-Israelis forces can't win a conventional war now. That's why even Hezbollah and Hamas are postponing real war. Indeed, I can't see them winning a conventional war in the forseeable future. Only if the neighbouring countries get rich enough to muster conventional forces to defeat Israel could they hope to do so. And if the Arab states do get to that point, they will hopefully have the maturity to see they have nothing much to gain and even more to lose by an apocalyptic regional war. Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia have probably already come to this realisation at the government level, although some of their people still fall prey to the malevolent calls to arms.

All the anti-Israeli hardliners can do is more of what is already been done - bombings, kidnappings, ethnic hatreds etc. Let's call it the Baghdad scenario. Doesn't that sound appealing?


... I do sometimes feel happy for those who die.. Why? Well, what did they miss? Death? Starvation? ..

Hyperbole. Palestinians in Israel, Jordan, Lebanon and the Palestine areas are not starving and or face death on any mass scale. They could have decent enough lives - heck even good ones (as many ordinary folk in poorer parts of the world like Africa or South Asia do) but they are being ruined by foolish calls to war.

Do you really think killing hundreds of thousands of people is going to make the Palestinians better off? That taking a bit of land from Israel would compensate them for the losses required? Why not focus on trying to make Jordan, Lebanon, Palestine etc as successful as South Korea or Singapore?

Warmongering debases the culture and morals of a people, diverts or drives away the skilled and the constructive, surrenders politics to the murderous and the scoundrels, and guarantees only death, maiming and grief.

[Husar]

You all seem to go with this "children suiciders".. Just one question: How many times did that happen?
"sending one´s children" does not necessarily imply an age restriction, I´m twenty and still a child of my parents, so I think it happened quite often.~;)


Where comes the belief of people.. Things you can't explain because you just don't live them.
And how can the dead suicide bombers live them?
If you are talking about afterlife, then my suggestion is all Palestinians strap bombs to themselves and rush against Israel, then all will come to heaven and the whole problem is solved. and don´t call that unrealistic, if you really believe that everyone who dies fighting the infidels will go to heaven, why don´t you all go and die fighting the infidels if your life here is so miserable? You could end the pain very quickly.
I´d still prefer a peaceful solution though.


Hesbullah has freed some of the captives through that way, and only that way.. So, what are you suggesting?
My suggestion is that you stop the endless cycle of retaliation.
If I remember correctly, it was usually some suicide bomber who broke all attempts of ceasefires in the past.
But as said before, it´s all about power, the master brains behind those terrorists don´t want peace and some water for their people, they want power, and not retaliating shows weakness in their minds(I think it shows some strength, backbone and will for peace) so they will keep retaliating and attacking.

For me the difference between Israel and terrorgroups like Hesbollah and Hamas is that Israel retaliates but the terrorists retaliate and attack, that´s why I believe they are the ones who need to stop first. But then again, they don´t want to stop, if Israel did nothing, they´d just pile up on the border and bomb Israel.

You also mention prisoners, in my opinion prisoners are given back after the fighting has stopped and negotiations have succeeded, as long as you won´t stop the fighting and start to negotiate, your chances to get them back are very low IMO.

If you stop violence and play a victim who cannot be blamed, international support for your cause is very likely to rise.

[Redleg]

Define terrorism.

I use the definition that is easily available with a little research.



I was using your link to evident what I said.

that is not what the links state.



..And, maybe you should blame your understanding skills rather than my outstanding english ones ~;)

See above.



No, not my poor english skills, move on.


It seems you have a problem....



I never implied that opinion. My opinion is that attacks on millitary are justified because Israel holds captives.


So attacking civilians as a diversion tactic concurrent with an attack on a military target is acceptable in your opinion? Remember Hezoballoh also conducted a missile attack on military and civilian targets concurrent with the snatch (kidnap) of the two Israeli soldiers....



Oh right.. It wasn't a trade.. lol


Israel claims it was not a trade. Timing kind of shows otherwise. Your comment is still wrong - because Israel has indeed conduct prisoner exchanges before..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3438697.stm


Each side sent detainees to an air base in Germany, where identities were checked before Israel gave the signal for a mass release of Palestinians.

A second stage of the prisoner exchange is awaiting moves by both sides.

The swap in Cologne followed three years of talks and went ahead despite a suicide bus bombing in Jerusalem that killed at least 10 people.

There has been criticism from some Israeli politicians, who say it could strengthen militant groups and encourage future kidnappings, and complaints from the Palestinian side that most prisoners released in the deal were scheduled to be freed soon anyway.


It seems a even newer story defeats that particlur arguement even more soundly.... A little research confirms that prisoner exchanges have happened in the past.



There is no such thing as nuetral, everyone is biased, but it differs how much.


Nuetral sources are available - its a matter of sorting out your own biased views to look for it.



I can go back and move on from where I left it, and I have a lot yet to add. (Or repeat)


Then do so - but don't think when someone provides facts that disprove your point that they are calling your dog a cat. What was shown was that your facts were inaccurate and false for the most part. This was not just done by myself but several patrons.



Well, Nasrullah said on the TV yesterday that they started attacking millitary targets, with the intent to capture a few soldiers and trade them for captives. "Though, Israel persuaded and invaded into Lebanon and killed civilians all the way, and so we also kept the pitch our attacks in the same level with them."

Standard statement of a man that realizes that maybe his plan of action has backfired. Conduct an act of war against a nation they just might conduct an act of war against you back. It seem Nasrullah also continues to deny several missile attacks against civilian targets also.



And what about the captives?


What about them? One attempts to continue to negotate their release. If they were Hezoballoh terrorists as a Lebanese I would let them rot in jail.



Attacks on civilians from anyone = Not supported, I pity those who die, not get thrilled over their death.


Then you need to question your support of Hezoballoh and Hamas - both activity attack civilians (in other words they both attack civilian targets - avoiding the legimate military targets.)



You've answered a question I didn't ask, bravo!

Oh but you did -



Care to explain? Or you're just saying that since a lot of countries consider them so, why shouldn't I?

The explaination is self evident - the actions of both groups is consisent with terrorist activities as defined by multiple nations. Maybe you should determine if your definition of a terrorist is the same as the one used by multiple nations.



Never. BUT, ask yourself when was the last time they did that to a Palestinian child?

Just about 10 monthes ago if I remember the news correctly -


On October 11, a 14-year-old Palestinian boy was arrested by IDF forces. He told the soldiers he was forced to agree to commit a suicide bombing when two terrorists from Fatah's Tanzim faction threatened to murder him by spreading a leaflet accusing him of collaboration unless he agreed. They took pictures of him with a gun and the Qur'an and forced him to write his own will.[15]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_suicide_bomber



Not really, they did release some, but always with something in return, mostly that being people as well.

Again you are incorrect - trying to quibble by saying not really is only that.



I said initiated an attack against civilians.


And again you were incorrect - the raid to capture the soldiers was started with a diversionary attack with missiles launched not only at military outposts but civilian targets also. Several news agencies clearly state that statement in thier initial reports.


Simultaneously with this ambush, Hezbollah also launched a diversionary attack: a barrage of mortar shells and Katyusha rockets on communities and IDF outposts in the western part of the border area. That assault wounded five civilians, though none seriously: Some were lightly wounded, and the others suffered from shock.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/737825.html

A diversion is an initiated attack -




Agreed. Though, I do sometimes feel happy for those who die.. Why? Well, what did they miss? Death? Starvation? ..

You might want to rethink your postion here...



You all seem to go with this "children suiciders".. Just one question: How many times did that happen?


You can read about it here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_suicide_bomber

by the wikipedia count it looks to be close to 50 - which is more then I would of thought. I view the use of one as unacceptable.

To answer other posters point - the article clearly states that children are defined as under 18 years of age



Also Redleg, the point of this argument/discussion is to try and view the other side's point, along with trying to convince as many people as possible through it of the various points through it. Just to let you know, I have nothing personal against you, or anyone else, just a lot against your ideas.

That might be your point - I do not tend to agree with individuals that think using children to conduct sucide bombings are freedom fighters.....

You should address the idea not the individual - it normally results in a discussion around the subject versus the individuals.

I find your support of Hamas and Hezabollah to be just as distasteful since they both habitually attack primarily civilians targets avoiding the military target. If your not willing to address that fact - then continue to find my ideas distasteful.

[Incongruous]

because just before he caim in to power israel gave away land and now every tom dick and harry (or muhammed) thinks they can get another piece of it

Funny that Bar Kuchba Sounds exactly like the zionists of the early twentieth century.:inquisitive:

[PanzerJaeger]

And Panzerjaeger, I don't think this would be hypocritical. If the US were to condemn the actions of Israel and vote against Israel it would be hypocritical but by not voting it makes a point of don't push it. No need to push the Syrians and possibly the Egyptians to all out war with Israel again.


How does Afghanistan come into this or even remotely relate to the present situation? Afganistan had the full support of the international community (or, at least, everyone that mattered), was targeted not only by US forces, but forces from a large number of countries (again, with a large number of those countries staunchly opposing the war in Iraq).

AQ, harbored by Afghanistan launched attacks against the United States civilian populace. Hezbollah, harbored by Lebanon, has launched attacks against the Israeli populace ever since Israel - in an attempt to make peace - withdrew from the area.

It would be very hypocritical for the US to say - by abstaining or vetoing - "We can go around the world and crush anyone who harbors terrorists that attack us, but you cannot.", especially to one of our staunchest allies.

You say 2 or 3 soldiers and some civilians dead dont justify this. Does 2 or 3 thousand deaths in a country of 300 million justify the Afghan operation? The US government decided that it did, and it would be pretty hypocritical to deny Israel what the US wouldnt deny itself - defence.



I've always wondered what Israel actually does for the US to merit this unequivocal support. Britain, which has repeatedly committed troops to US ventures, gets more rebuffs (remember the furore over the F-35?). When was the last time Israel sent troops for US defence or foreign policy?

Well, the fact that muslims hate jews to such an extent has made the presence of soldiers from the Jewish nations in US-led coalitions untenable. Israel does offer priceless intelligence and behind the scenes support.

PS. My comment about muslims is not my own opinion. It is well documented fact that the Israel was asked to stay out of the first Gulf War, even after being attacked by Iraq, for fear that Jews would inflame the greater muslim world.

[PanzerJaeger]

Also Pannonian,

Britain is a strong, stand-alone nation. It doesnt rise or fall on what the US says or does.

Not only does Britain have a relatively strong army, it also has the EU for support, plus it doesnt have enemies breathing down its proverbial neck.

Therefore, the US and Britain are in more of a position to have disagreements.

Israel, on the other hand, needs US backing desperately. If it was observed in the arab world that Israel had lost that, the situation would deteriorate further.

So I am sure if another Hitler came to Europe, Britain would have the unwavering support of the US, but right now that is not the case.

[Pannonian]

Well, the fact that muslims hate jews to such an extent has made the presence of soldiers from the Jewish nations in US-led coalitions untenable. Israel does offer priceless intelligence and behind the scenes support.

PS. My comment about muslims is not my own opinion. It is well documented fact that the Israel was asked to stay out of the first Gulf War, even after being attacked by Iraq, for fear that Jews would inflame the greater muslim world.
Has Israel ever sent troops to Liberia, or any of the other areas where Muslims aren't involved? Has Israel ever committed troops to defend US interests anywhere? Korea? Japan?

Didn't Washington warn against identifying with friends and allies, since it was unlikely they would feel the same about you? The American infatuation with Israel baffles me.

[PanzerJaeger]

From the beginning, Israel has been in conflict in both the high and low ends of the spectrum.

I doubt that if Britain was at war with, say, France and Germany, the US would ask or expect them to commit troops to Korea or Japan - especially when there is no actual conflict going on there.

Also, Israel is a tiny nation with a tiny population that has been under seige for decades. It doesnt have plenty of extra soldiers just sitting around doing nothing.

[Pannonian]

Also Pannonian,

Britain is a strong, stand-alone nation. It doesnt rise or fall on what the US says or does.

Not only does Britain have a relatively strong army, it also has the EU for support, plus it doesnt have enemies breathing down its proverbial neck.

The IDF is more than capable of beating the whole Arab world in a conventional war by itself. Regarding unconventional weapons, Israel reportedly has a larger nuclear stockpile than Britain.



Therefore, the US and Britain are in more of a position to have disagreements.

Israel, on the other hand, needs US backing desperately. If it was observed in the arab world that Israel had lost that, the situation would deteriorate further.

What does the US get for its unconditional backing of Israel? Does the US have any influence on the Israeli government's actions? A couple of weeks ago, Bush warned that Olmert's threats of assassinating the Palestinian PM were undesirable. Not long after, the Palestinian PM's office was hit by an Israeli missile.



So I am sure if another Hitler came to Europe, Britain would have the unwavering support of the US, but right now that is not the case.
Thatcher had to do a great deal of leaning before US support was forthcoming in the Falklands war (which amounted to giving us missiles we had already bought without the usual clearing period). The French were more forward in volunteering their help (giving us information about their weapons systems they had sold in the region). There are Anglophobes in both Washington and Paris. However, the French do not pretend they like us, but they will defend us without prompting whenever we are threatened.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeane_Kirkpatrick

[yesdachi]

Has Israel ever sent troops to Liberia, or any of the other areas where Muslims aren't involved? Has Israel ever committed troops to defend US interests anywhere? Korea? Japan?
IIRC Israeli troops and armor were involved in assisting the US out of Mogadishu in 93”. They may have been part of a larger UN force. Doesn’t mean much but it is just a little something I remember. :bow:

[stalin]

Absolutely disguisting, i totally condone the illegal agression by the Nazi Jews

[Pannonian]

Absolutely disguisting, i totally condone the illegal agression by the Nazi Jews
1. How is this illegal aggression? An armed force condoned or supported by a foreign government attacks Israel, Israel strikes back. An over-reaction certainly, but in principle Israel is entitled to take some kind of action.
2. How are the Israelis Nazis? Do you even know what Nazism is?
3. Why Jews? Israel is a country. Jews are a subsection of that country. You're talking about Israelis, not Jews.
4. Why do you condone the aggression if you condemn it as illegal at the same time?

The usual semi-literate anti-semitic crap.

[Reenk Roink]

4. Why do you condone the aggression if you condemn it as illegal at the same time?

Nitpicking a mistake really brought down your points there...

They were good up till #4...

[KrooK]

Wars on middle East has been started by Israel.
When muslims countries agreed on peace in 1949 (or 1950), they wanted respect peace. But Israel attacked in 1956 and muslim countries do not trust him.
Later Israel attacked Lebanon in 80ties and was responsible for murdering about 17.000 civilians, mostly women and children.
Lebanon has never been dangerous for Israel. It's small and weak country.

In my opinion Israel is most racist country now. They are pround to be Jews, think that Jews are best in the world but.... When somebody tell anything bad about Jew, even about jewish pedofile , jewish thief or jewish murder, Israel keep telling that he is racist, nazist, ex-SS soldier. I wonder why Jews aren't liked in many countries. Maybe because they demand equal terms but don't give equal terms others.

Jews are catching criminals from WW2 and it's good. But then jewish criminal Sharon became Israeli Prime Minister. And world exepted that Palestinians agree on that. I wonder what would Jews tell if Eichman became german cancelor in 1957.

In the end I want tell something - maybe world shouldn't try to like Jews.
Maybe Jews should do something to be liked instead of demanding and only demanding.

[Redleg]

The usual semi-literate anti-semitic crap.

This was probably enough of a response about [b]stalin's[b] post. Actually he is fast approaching a rarity for me - the ignore list.

[Redleg]

Wars on middle East has been started by Israel.

You should review history a bit more before making such statements - your only going to look foolish when individuals begin to bring up the history of the Israeli-Arab conflicts that have happened since 1948.

Well for the rest I wonder if I should give you a pass or just assume that your something worse?

[L'Impresario]

*wrong topic*

meant for the other Middle East thread heh

[Tribesman]

Well it was all said very well in post#8 , then seconded in post#9

Uh-oh...

[x-dANGEr]

@Simon: I'm talking about Palestinians.. Am talking about those living in the South of Lebanon.. Most of them have their relatives captivated, and most of them live through grief each day..

Another solution than war would be that we all learn to live in peace, and allow the access of Muslims into al-Aqsa.. But I think that is far to happen, from both ends mind you.

If you are talking about afterlife, then my suggestion is all Palestinians strap bombs to themselves and rush against Israel, then all will come to heaven and the whole problem is solved. and don´t call that unrealistic, if you really believe that everyone who dies fighting the infidels will go to heaven, why don´t you all go and die fighting the infidels if your life here is so miserable? You could end the pain very quickly.

Yes, I'm talking about the afterlife. But believe me, Islam isn't as simple as that, and to go deep in it, neither I nor you can.

You also mention prisoners, in my opinion prisoners are given back after the fighting has stopped and negotiations have succeeded, as long as you won´t stop the fighting and start to negotiate, your chances to get them back are very low IMO.
But I think freeing prisoners would throw us a lot closer to the "peace" status.

For me the difference between Israel and terrorgroups like Hesbollah and Hamas is that Israel retaliates but the terrorists retaliate and attack, that´s why I believe they are the ones who need to stop first. But then again, they don´t want to stop, if Israel did nothing, they´d just pile up on the border and bomb Israel.

What about Jenin camp? (Where I was born)

So attacking civilians as a diversion tactic concurrent with an attack on a military target is acceptable in your opinion? Remember Hezoballoh also conducted a missile attack on military and civilian targets concurrent with the snatch (kidnap) of the two Israeli soldiers....

The thing here is that your sources say what you did, and ours say what I did.. So really, Hesbullah didn't attack civilians to do that on my side of the window.. In fact, he was asked from where did he capture the 2 soldiers, in Lebanon or Israel, and he answered "I can't tell you, what matters is that we ahve them", so I wonder how your "sources" managed to get that info. And this also "neglects" the statement of yours:

xDANGER -1 no knowledge of missile attacks into civilian cities as a diversion

Israel claims it was not a trade. Timing kind of shows otherwise. Your comment is still wrong - because Israel has indeed conduct prisoner exchanges before..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3438697.stm

So you really have english understanding skills.. ~:( Look what you replied to:

"Well, I do think that 'conditions' of that peace was to set free the prisoners, and that hasn't been done, even once in the whole Israeli history without a trade."


Nuetral sources are available - its a matter of sorting out your own biased views to look for it.
This is no fact to stick or not, it is a matter in one's view, in other words opinion.

Then do so - but don't think when someone provides facts that disprove your point that they are calling your dog a cat. What was shown was that your facts were inaccurate and false for the most part. This was not just done by myself but several patrons.

Facts as in me being wrong that Israeli fighters were british, as they were Czech?

Standard statement of a man that realizes that maybe his plan of action has backfired. Conduct an act of war against a nation they just might conduct an act of war against you back. It seem Nasrullah also continues to deny several missile attacks against civilian targets also.
If so, it is only one's word VS another's.

What about them? One attempts to continue to negotate their release. If they were Hezoballoh terrorists as a Lebanese I would let them rot in jail.
Attempts to negotiate with no use.. And about the second part, I can just imagine you in front of them ~:) After all, we do live in an age when resistance is camouflaged by "terrorism" (In better words, a time when a resistance is called terrorism).

Then you need to question your support of Hezoballoh and Hamas - both activity attack civilians (in other words they both attack civilian targets - avoiding the legimate military targets.)
I do support the cause, but not importantly the way. Though, for all I know Hesbullag hasnt initiated an attack on civilians yet. About Hamas, well, Israel also kill civilians, loads of them actually.. No, one nation's wrong doesn't justify the other's, but encourages it. I do mourn the Israli civilians that die, and the Palestinian too, but I can't blame Hamas, for it is not a fair war they're fighting.. What can they do? Yes, they can stop fighting, but to what? I'm more than sure Israel won't anyway, it always manages to break the peace somehow.. (I lost my faith in Israel "peace" since the destruction of Jenin camp)

The explaination is self evident - the actions of both groups is consisent with terrorist activities as defined by multiple nations. Maybe you should determine if your definition of a terrorist is the same as the one used by multiple nations.
Multiple nations? Well, I know there are doubles of that considering them "not-terrorists", more than those who consider them terrorists. So??!!

Just about 10 monthes ago if I remember the news correctly -And one more time, the famous Redleg manages to answer a question not addressed to him, with an answer not related to the question!!! Bravo!

Read back a little eh!

But ask yourself this question when was the last time Israel sent a child into a bus with a bomb strapped to their chest to become a matyr to God......


Never. BUT, ask yourself when was the last time they did that to a Palestinian child?

So, what are you answering again?

Again you are incorrect - trying to quibble by saying not really is only that.I love it how you think that you saying "incorrect" actually makes me believe it is "incorrect".. Funny!

And again you were incorrect - the raid to capture the soldiers was started with a diversionary attack with missiles launched not only at military outposts but civilian targets also. Several news agencies clearly state that statement in thier initial reports.

That's what your part of the window says.. So you also can't be definate if it is correct or not, for each side says it its way. So again, you're incorrect in juding that I'm incorrect, since this isn't a crystal clear thing to decide wheather it is correct or not.

by the wikipedia count it looks to be close to 50 - which is more then I would of thought. I view the use of one as unacceptable.
At first: That counts close to 50, yes, but not only suicide bombers, also those who carried bombs (Maybe they were transporting them?)..

Anyway, just a little note.. In Islam, it is honorable to die for your country, and will get you in heaven in the after life, and is also a must for every muslim on earth (Which is why if Islam is really followed, no nation would dare to attack a muslim..).

[ChewieTobbacca]

Anyway, just a little note.. In Islam, it is honorable to die for your country, and will get you in heaven in the after life, and is also a must for every muslim on earth (Which is why if Islam is really followed, no nation would dare to attack a muslim..).

I will say that Japan had those same notions in WW2 and many fought suicidally... but that didn't work in the end.

[yesdachi]

Another solution than war would be that we all learn to live in peace,
You can’t expect peace when one sides religion is interpreted to promote a superiority complex over the infidel and that everyone else is the infidel. :sad:

[Redleg]

The thing here is that your sources say what you did, and ours say what I did.. So really, Hesbullah didn't attack civilians to do that on my side of the window.. In fact, he was asked from where did he capture the 2 soldiers, in Lebanon or Israel, and he answered "I can't tell you, what matters is that we ahve them", so I wonder how your "sources" managed to get that info. And this also "neglects" the statement of yours:

Then you might want to question your sources - it seems it conflicts with both the neutral western reports and there own statements. It seems your attempting to contradict yourself - the soldiers by all reports were taken in Israel on patrol between two of the Israeli outposts.



So you really have english understanding skills.. ~:( Look what you replied to:


The poor understanding is yours - again two sources that demonstrate that Israel has released captives - one as a trade being questionable and one that clearly indicates that Israel has indeed conducted trades concerning captives.



"Well, I do think that 'conditions' of that peace was to set free the prisoners, and that hasn't been done, even once in the whole Israeli history without a trade."


Again incorrect - you might want to read the BBC article a little more clearly - it talks about a prisoner exchange between Israel and another group.



This is no fact to stick or not, it is a matter in one's view, in other words opinion.


Incorrect facts are facts - opinions are based upon either a fact or a falsehood.



Facts as in me being wrong that Israeli fighters were british, as they were Czech?

Much more then that.



If so, it is only one's word VS another's.

Not at all the evidence is in the missile and motar attacks - I bet you don't know that the firing arcs of the missiles and motars are tracked by radar.. Its not hard to find out where they come from..



Attempts to negotiate with no use.. And about the second part, I can just imagine you in front of them ~:) After all, we do live in an age when resistance is camouflaged by "terrorism" (In better words, a time when a resistance is called terrorism).

Resistance against the government of a nation is not necessarily a bad thing. Putting a bomb on a child and sending them into a crowded civilian area to blow themselves up can only be seen as one thing - especially when the cowards that force the child to do such a thing don't go with the child.



I do support the cause, but not importantly the way. Though, for all I know Hesbullag hasnt initiated an attack on civilians yet.

Its been shown,

Lets but it simply do you support terrorism? The cause of a free Palenstine would be better served without the likes of Hamas and Hezoballoh.



About Hamas, well, Israel also kill civilians, loads of them actually.. No, one nation's wrong doesn't justify the other's, but encourages it. I do mourn the Israli civilians that die, and the Palestinian too, but I can't blame Hamas, for it is not a fair war they're fighting.. What can they do? Yes, they can stop fighting, but to what? I'm more than sure Israel won't anyway, it always manages to break the peace somehow.. (I lost my faith in Israel "peace" since the destruction of Jenin camp)

You can blame Hamas for its acts of terrorism. Having a restistance against a government that they believe is a tryant is different from committing acts of terror against civilians that happen to live in the same area.



Multiple nations? Well, I know there are doubles of that considering them "not-terrorists", more than those who consider them terrorists. So??!!

So address your point - it seems your having problems identifing your own definition of a terrorist.



And one more time, the famous Redleg manages to answer a question not addressed to him, with an answer not related to the question!!! Bravo!


you did ask the question - and you got an answer. To bad you didn't like the answer. If you didn't like the answer maybe you should ask a clear precise question instead of a vague one. Are you attempting to deny the news report that states a 14 year old palenstine child had a bomb straped to his chest and was going to be a matyr for god?



I love it how you think that you saying "incorrect" actually makes me believe it is "incorrect".. Funny!


Probably because you truely are incorrect....




That's what your part of the window says.. So you also can't be definate if it is correct or not, for each side says it its way. So again, you're incorrect in juding that I'm incorrect, since this isn't a crystal clear thing to decide wheather it is correct or not.

Denying the missile strikes happen does not make it so - provide a counter in the form of evidence. It seems your still incorrect and refusing to acknowledge that missiles were fired at civilians as a diversion for the attack on soldiers by Hezoballoh. Interesting - To bad the missile strikes are also in several arab papers - it seems your running out of wiggle room to deny that the strikes happened.



At first: That counts close to 50, yes, but not only suicide bombers, also those who carried bombs (Maybe they were transporting them?)..


So are you still attempting to defend terrorists who use children to carry out sucide bombings because they are too cowardly to do it themselves...



Anyway, just a little note.. In Islam, it is honorable to die for your country, and will get you in heaven in the after life, and is also a must for every muslim on earth (Which is why if Islam is really followed, no nation would dare to attack a muslim..).

Then that is the failure of the religous teachings.... ....Time for muslims to have a reformation if that truely is the belief of the Koran - you have to quote the exact passage - since I don't remember reading that particlur passage in the Koran when I read it many years ago....

[Silver Rusher]

2 soldiers are captured. 8 people die from Hesbollah missile attacks. Israel goes into a country full of innocent people who have nothing to do with the attacks, blows up bridges, attacks towns, blockades ports and even bombs the runways of the main airport, killing far more people than were even effected by the attacks on Israel.

Is there something I'm not getting, or is trying to defend Israel's actions futile?

[Tribesman]

You can’t expect peace when one sides religion is interpreted to promote a superiority complex over the infidel and that everyone else is the infidel
Thats funny , I read a nice rant this morning where someone was going on about how Israel would once again show its superiority and prove how the chosen people are better than the Xtian followers of a failed heretical wannabe rabbi or the mohommadean followers of a bastard descended former slave false prophet .:dizzy2:
Some people do interpret their religeon in strange ways don't they , on all sides .
BTW the poster of that rant is on the comment blog pages as a regular "contributor" on both Haaretz and the Guardian websites , pay them a visit sometime , mindless hate filled bile from both sides on a daily basis:coffeenews:

[Husar]

Is there something I'm not getting, or is trying to defend Israel's actions futile?
That depends.
I guess Lebanon didn´t keep Hesbollah out of their country and so Israel got pissed, comparable to the US and Afghanistan. The US didn´t invade Germany even though the terrorists studied here. That is because we didn´t knowingly help them and had caught them if we had known their intentions.
So maybe the Lebanese government is at fault here as well.

I´m sorry for the Lebanese people though, at least those who didn´t help Hesbollah. I hope this occupation will soon end and that they won´t get another civil war.:no:

[Redleg]

2 soldiers are captured. 8 people die from Hesbollah missile attacks. Israel goes into a country full of innocent people who have nothing to do with the attacks, blows up bridges, attacks towns, blockades ports and even bombs the runways of the main airport, killing far more people than were even effected by the attacks on Israel.

Is there something I'm not getting, or is trying to defend Israel's actions futile?

That is why you don't see me defending Israel's actions - they have reacted in a manner that plays into the extremists hands. Be it the terrorists that control Hamas or Hezoballoh, or the extremists within Israel that do not want peace.

However one can be very criticial of Hezoballoh and its actions without defending Israel. Hezoballoh has again shown itself to be the terrorist organization that it is. Anybody catch the language of the three arab nations that have condemned the actions. Its very carefully worded - but it tells a specific point.

[solypsist]

okay fellas i'm breaking up this love-fest only to update on the fact that Hezbollah has introduced a new angle on this theatre:

unmanned drones (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060714/ap_on_re_mi_ea/mideast_fighting_warship_2).

[Beirut]

Monkey see - monkey do.

[Redleg]

okay fellas i'm breaking up this love-fest only to update on the fact that Hezbollah has introduced a new angle on this theatre:

unmanned drones (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060714/ap_on_re_mi_ea/mideast_fighting_warship_2).

Yes indeed, did you catch the new article about the "Open War" by the leader of Hezobollah.

Its about to become even uglier - and bloodier in Lebanon and northern Israel.

[Pannonian]

BTW the poster of that rant is on the comment blog pages as a regular "contributor" on both Haaretz and the Guardian websites , pay them a visit sometime , mindless hate filled bile from both sides on a daily basis:coffeenews:
URL?

[Husar]

Hmm, yeah, I just went to see what the arabian press has to say about the issue and came across two articles:
http://www.aljazeera.com/me.asp?service_ID=11726
http://www.aljazeera.com/me.asp?service_ID=11716

Just wanted to throw them in, but I think the first is somewhat generalizing and overreacting if not completely wrong.:juggle2:

[econ21]

Another solution than war would be that we all learn to live in peace...

That sounds like a plan. Why don't we argue for that rather than war? Seriously, we only have a certain time on this earth and trying to blow each other up is probably not the best use of it.


... and allow the access of Muslims into al-Aqsa. .

Absolutely no problem with that.


But I think that is far to happen, from both ends mind you/

No, it won't happen for quite a long time it seems. But sooner or later, I guess it will happen. I don't see either side anhilating the other. And I suspect whatever territorial concessions violence brings will be small compared to their direct cost in suffering. Let's try to cut out the interim bloodletting and get to the peaceful settlement more directly.

[x-dANGEr]

Then you might want to question your sources - it seems it conflicts with both the neutral western reports and there own statements. It seems your attempting to contradict yourself - the soldiers by all reports were taken in Israel on patrol between two of the Israeli outposts.Reports that eventually go back to Israel.. I think Hesbullah has more creditibilty than Israeli officials, why? Yesterday during his "speech", he said "And right now, at this moment, the Israeli Destroyer is on fire, and probably will drawn sooon with all its sailors!!", oh and yea it was on fire. And, I don't see any reason to believe anything from Israeli officials..

The poor understanding is yours - again two sources that demonstrate that Israel has released captives - one as a trade being questionable and one that clearly indicates that Israel has indeed conducted trades concerning captives.

So? Where is the one without a trade?!

Again incorrect - you might want to read the BBC article a little more clearly - it talks about a prisoner exchange between Israel and another group.

You post a sentence that agrees to what I say, and say I'm incorrect.. Are you sure you're awake when you post your replies? I know that it does, which is why I posted what I did!

Incorrect facts are facts - opinions are based upon either a fact or a falsehood.
Did I say anything else?

Much more then that.

Yeah right.. ~:rolleyes:

Not at all the evidence is in the missile and motar attacks - I bet you don't know that the firing arcs of the missiles and motars are tracked by radar.. Its not hard to find out where they come from..
If it was that easy, why couldn't they just destroy the launching sites?
Resistance against the government of a nation is not necessarily a bad thing. Putting a bomb on a child and sending them into a crowded civilian area to blow themselves up can only be seen as one thing - especially when the cowards that force the child to do such a thing don't go with the child.

Hesbullah did that?

Its been shown,

Lets but it simply do you support terrorism? The cause of a free Palenstine would be better served without the likes of Hamas and Hezoballoh.
No, but I support resistance.
So address your point - it seems your having problems identifing your own definition of a terrorist.

My definition of terrorism: "A term used to cover the whole terrorizing organisations in old Europe, and is now used to disgrace resistance by calling it so."

you did ask the question - and you got an answer. To bad you didn't like the answer. If you didn't like the answer maybe you should ask a clear precise question instead of a vague one. Are you attempting to deny the news report that states a 14 year old palenstine child had a bomb straped to his chest and was going to be a matyr for god?

The question clearly stated: "How many times did Israel do that to Palestinian childs?", and you answer with what? I haven't asked the question: "How many times child suicide bombers were spotted?" so you answer me with that.. Gash, you read in your own world!!

Probably because you truely are incorrect....
If you say so ~:rolleyes:

So are you still attempting to defend terrorists who use children to carry out sucide bombings because they are too cowardly to do it themselves...All is Israeli propoganda.. I'm a Palestinian, and I know Palestinian, and no kid of them would be "scared" or be "forced" to do that.. Actually, because of the self-impulse to such acts, we have many songs advicing the young children to think it through and stop at, as it is too early for them..

Then that is the failure of the religous teachings.... ....Time for muslims to have a reformation if that truely is the belief of the Koran - you have to quote the exact passage - since I don't remember reading that particlur passage in the Koran when I read it many years ago....

Yeap.

You can’t expect peace when one sides religion is interpreted to promote a superiority complex over the infidel and that everyone else is the infidel. It is the principle of Islam: If you leave us in peace, we leave you in peace.

I´m sorry for the Lebanese people though, at least those who didn´t help Hesbollah. I hope this occupation will soon end and that they won´t get another civil war.Don't be.. They're all backing their country with honour, interviews, phonecalls and all kind of things reach the channel networks, with them all saying we're proud of this resistance. (Mind you, the Lebanese army in corporation with Hesbullah has failed a dropping operation for Israeli soldiers.. And that has pumped the morale of all Lebanese way up).

@Simon: If only we all could live in peace.. But that wouldn't happen at all the way I see it. I think what will last happen, is Israel conquering Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Palestine and Lebanon.. You might say I'm way off my lead, but that will happen, sooner or later.

[Husar]

My definition of terrorism: "A term used to cover the whole terrorizing organisations in old Europe, and is now used to disgrace resistance by calling it so."
Then please explain the difference between the terror organisations from Europe and the "freedom fighters" from the middle east, except that you gave them different names.
You might also want to explain how blowing up restaurants and buses will bring back your freedom.


All is Israeli propoganda.. I'm a Palestinian, and I know Palestinian, and no kid of them would be "scared" or be "forced" to do that.. Actually, because of the self-impulse to such acts, we have many songs advicing the young children to think it through and stop at, as it is too early for them..
But those Israeli children who are blown up are never too young?:inquisitive:


It is the principle of Islam: If you leave us in peace, we leave you in peace.
The conquests of Mohammed clearly showed that...:juggle2:

[x-dANGEr]

Then please explain the difference between the terror organisations from Europe and the "freedom fighters" from the middle east, except that you gave them different names.
Those in Europe fought mainly for cash! The resistance organisations fight for freedom?


You might also want to explain how blowing up restaurants and buses will bring back your freedom.

It will press the "colonizers" to go back to where they originally came from.

But those Israeli children who are blown up are never too young?What is the relevancy of this to the statement you quoted?

The conquests of Mohammed clearly showed that...Yeap. The campaign against Persians started because they killed an emmisery sent by the muslims.

[econ21]

I think what will last happen, is Israel conquering Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Palestine and Lebanon.. You might say I'm way off my lead, but that will happen, sooner or later.

I'm not sure if you are massively over-estimating your opponent or massively under-estimating the Arabs. The last few years have shown even the US - as the richest country in the world, a military hyperpower and with a population of 296 million - cannot conquer Iraq (not in the sense of permanently occupying it). Not sure why you think Israel, with only 6 million, could do any better. Heck, she can't even hold on to the Gaza strip. The worst I think the Israelis are up to is trying to annex some choice bits of the West Bank and of course Old Jerusalem (actions I find rephrensible BTW).

[stalin]

1. How is this illegal aggression? An armed force condoned or supported by a foreign government attacks Israel, Israel strikes back. An over-reaction certainly, but in principle Israel is entitled to take some kind of action.
2. How are the Israelis Nazis? Do you even know what Nazism is?
3. Why Jews? Israel is a country. Jews are a subsection of that country. You're talking about Israelis, not Jews.
4. Why do you condone the aggression if you condemn it as illegal at the same time?

The usual semi-literate anti-semitic crap.

You do know that both the lebanese AND the palestinians are semites too?
Pointing to a war 60 years ago and whining about it makes for a poor excuse for treating others with equal brutality especially if they(palestinians) live in a ghetto, are racially segregated like in south africa and you need their land for your own lebensraum. When one side drives tanks and the other throws rocks then you have to take sides. Illegal cos the whole world is condoning the Jew state brutality.

[Tsavong]

Its probably worth pointing out if it hasn’t been already ( I got bord and could not be arced to read all the rants) that Hezbollah emerged with financial backing from Iran in the early 1980s and began a struggle to drive Israeli troops from Lebanon, which in its self was justified thing to do, would any one here say the Republic of Ireland is an illegal state as it got independence though paramilitary action?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4314423.stm

any way my opinion on this conflict its stupid there is no reason for it and Hezbollah should not be around any more and the reaction of Israel is very OTT I wish they would have the decency to call what there doing as WAR instead of an incident or something which is what an Israeli General called it on the news last night

[Redleg]

Reports that eventually go back to Israel.. I think Hesbullah has more creditibilty than Israeli officials, why? Yesterday during his "speech", he said "And right now, at this moment, the Israeli Destroyer is on fire, and probably will drawn sooon with all its sailors!!", oh and yea it was on fire. And, I don't see any reason to believe anything from Israeli officials..


Both lack credibility - Hezabollah continues to deny that it targeted civilians as a diversionary attack...

One must read multiple sources and discover the facts for themselves. The Jordan Times is a decent read most of the time...




So? Where is the one without a trade?!


If you want to believe the Israeli's in the 1980's the first one was without a trade.



You post a sentence that agrees to what I say, and say I'm incorrect.. Are you sure you're awake when you post your replies? I know that it does, which is why I posted what I did!

It seems then that you do understand that Israel has conducted trades in the past. It also seems that you also fail to understand that Israel has let prisoners go without a trade in the past - the first article Israel makes the claim that it did the prisoner release without a condition of a trade - timing makes that claim questionable. But if you want a specific instance where Israel let prisoners go with any conditions try this one.

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/EA31A319-5B4E-406E-B5E3-A29D56053304.htm


Earlier on Thursday the prisoners boarded buses at a prison in southern Israel on their way to freedom, the last phase of an Israeli pledge to release 900 prisoners as part of a ceasefire deal.


It seem you still are incorrect. When one makes narrow statements its not hard to make them get fustrated and then point out the truth. It seems that not only does Israel trade prisoners (which was what I thought you first claimed) it also has released prisoners as conditions for a ceasefire. But I suppose you are looking for just plain old release prisoners.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2004-12-27-israel-prisoners_x.htm


BEITUNIA CHECKPOINT, West Bank (AP) — Israel released 159 Palestinian prisoners Monday as a gesture to the new Palestinian leadership.


Releasing prisoners almost always have some political considerations.






Did I say anything else?


You wouldn't have gotten that response if you had stated that.




If it was that easy, why couldn't they just destroy the launching sites?
Hesbullah did that?

Tracking is the easy part - destroying the launching sites of a very mobile system is extremely difficult. I am sure the details would be interesting for you - but I don't think I will share with you how counterbattery is actually done.




No, but I support resistance.

Then do you condemn the terror tactics of Hamas and Hezabollah?




My definition of terrorism: "A term used to cover the whole terrorizing organisations in old Europe, and is now used to disgrace resistance by calling it so."
Then this is your failure to understand the difference between resistance to a tryanny and the attacks on a civilian target.



The question clearly stated: "How many times did Israel do that to Palestinian childs?", and you answer with what? I haven't asked the question: "How many times child suicide bombers were spotted?" so you answer me with that..

The answer to your question is most likely none - I haven't seen any reports of Israeli soldiers or extremists strapping bombs to Palenstine children and having them blow themselves up in a civilian area. I am sure it would make the papers across the Arab world if such a thing ever happened.....:no:

I gave you the answer that I wanted to give you - attempting to play with words gets a counter back, which is exactly what was done - you ignored my question and asked one of your own. I answered my own question and ignored yours, if you want to play such a game - don't be surprised when it is played back.




Gash, you read in your own world!!
Yep - and I play the same word game that you are doing - answering the question that you don't want answered. And giving you the answer that you don't want to face. Care to play - your not doing so well at the game in which your wanting to play.



If you say so ~:rolleyes:

What you can't handle other peoples opinions.



All is Israeli propoganda.. I'm a Palestinian, and I know Palestinian, and no kid of them would be "scared" or be "forced" to do that.. Actually, because of the self-impulse to such acts, we have many songs advicing the young children to think it through and stop at, as it is too early for them..


Oh the propoganda claim - it seems to be a self-defeating arguement on your part. I have seen the news from Arab sources that claim the same exact information that the Palestinian terror groups are sending children to fight and use sucide bombs as matyr's. Are you claiming that those papers are also Israeli Propoganda....



Yeap.


Yeap to the reformation or yep there is a specific passage in the Koran that states its an honor to die for your country. Provide the exact quote...

[Redleg]

Those in Europe fought mainly for cash! The resistance organisations fight for freedom? The French Resistance fough mainly for cash....... now someone is attempting a major revision of history.

[Husar]

Those in Europe fought mainly for cash! The resistance organisations fight for freedom?
I was always of the impression the IRA wanted freedom for Ireland and those spanish terrorists want their province to be a free country or something like that. And Redleg already mentioned the French Resistance.


It will press the "colonizers" to go back to where they originally came from.
And how many do you think you need to kill until they feel pressured?
So far they don´t seem to feel like retreating into the sea. Instead it looks more like they advance even further...


What is the relevancy of this to the statement you quoted?
You tell your own kids not to blow themselves up as kids, yet when they are old enough, they can go and blow up Israeli kids. Do you think Israeli kids are worth less than your own?


Yeap. The campaign against Persians started because they killed an emmisery sent by the muslims.
And that campaign was the only thing he ever did?

[spmetla]

X-Danger, out of curiosity where do you get your news? Even al Jazeera is saying the same things that other "Western" news sources say.

X-Danger, do you deny that Hezbollah escalated the conflict by initially killing and kidnapping Israeli soldiers in Israeli territory? The Israelis had already set the standard of what they would do with the first kidnapping by Hamas so why would they be so stupid as to push Israel further? Have you heard the saying "don't mess with fire you gonna get burned", it definately applies here.

Furthermore with every post you make you show your bias and inability to come to term with well known facts that you CHOOSE to ignore. I think that the Israelis have definately overreacted and that they should not destroy so much of Lebanon as they have but I understand that they were the ones that were provoked into doing so. If Lebanon had disarmed Hezbollah when the Israelis left southern Lebanon in 2000 instead of letting them arm up we wouldn't have the problem right now.

Bear in mind in your debate with Redleg is with someone who was against the US protecting Israel with it's veto power. He's being much more objective than you and provides respected sources to points instead of just irrational emotional arguments that you provide. I suggest you review your standpoint and try first of all read what's being provided here with a more objective viewpoint before you reply next time. As of now your not contributing to a healthy debate at all but merely adding emotion without logic.

[Devastatin Dave]

Israel is still doing some serious whoop-assin' today!!! Get some!!!:2thumbsup:

[x-dANGEr]

Both lack credibility - Hezabollah continues to deny that it targeted civilians as a diversionary attack...

One must read multiple sources and discover the facts for themselves. The Jordan Times is a decent read most of the time...
Basically, all the "sources" go back to one millitary side, so why would you believe one and ignore the other? (I do believe in Hesbullah source, and you do believe in the Israeli one.. This leading us to what?)


When one makes narrow statements its not hard to make them get fustrated and then point out the truth.You got me there.


Yep - and I play the same word game that you are doing - answering the question that you don't want answered. And giving you the answer that you don't want to face. Care to play - your not doing so well at the game in which your wanting to play.
Examples..?! Really, you should answer questions I don't ask, maybe you should post them as infos rather than as answers.

What you can't handle other peoples opinions.An opinion is far from judging wheather a thing is "correct" or "incorrect" without qualifications to do so.

Oh the propoganda claim - it seems to be a self-defeating arguement on your part. I have seen the news from Arab sources that claim the same exact information that the Palestinian terror groups are sending children to fight and use sucide bombs as matyr's. Are you claiming that those papers are also Israeli Propoganda....

Links?! And noo.. On the TV around here I havent.

Releasing prisoners almost always have some political considerations.
Still the point stands.. What is the percent of "releases" without persons from the other side as well?

The French Resistance fough mainly for cash....... now someone is attempting a major revision of history.
It is resistance, not terrorism. So no, the 'mainly for cash' statement doesn't apply here.

I was always of the impression the IRA wanted freedom for Ireland and those spanish terrorists want their province to be a free country or something like that. And Redleg already mentioned the French Resistance.


And how many do you think you need to kill until they feel pressured?
So far they don´t seem to feel like retreating into the sea. Instead it looks more like they advance even further...
I tell you how things happen: Israel/Hamas attacks the other, and make most "civilian" casualties, the other retaliates, mostly on other civilian casualties.. Both are at fault, but I would support Hamas for it's goal at least, and it's effort not to stand down.. Why? Seemingly, the Ceasefire(s) that happened while I was alive/conscious have usually been broken by some Israeli plane assassinating someone.. Am I to be blamed? To think that peace is a never-will-happen thing? My arguments are emotional, and biased maybe.. But as objective as I can go, 1 statement puts the fault at one goverment more. Israel has captives, Palestine don't!

You tell your own kids not to blow themselves up as kids, yet when they are old enough, they can go and blow up Israeli kids. Do you think Israeli kids are worth less than your own?
See above.

And that campaign was the only thing he ever did?
Nope, pick one and I will get ya the reason. (Though, Prophet Mohammed has only made ones against other tribes, that always have started the agression against him, just to faint Islam when it is small still, because they all didn't accep the idea of "equality").

X-Danger, out of curiosity where do you get your news? Even al Jazeera is saying the same things that other "Western" news sources say.

Al Jazeera, Al Manad, Al Arabiya, ANB, Al Alam, MTV, NTV, etc..

X-Danger, do you deny that Hezbollah escalated the conflict by initially killing and kidnapping Israeli soldiers in Israeli territory? The Israelis had already set the standard of what they would do with the first kidnapping by Hamas so why would they be so stupid as to push Israel further? Have you heard the saying "don't mess with fire you gonna get burned", it definately applies here
You can't blame him. Why? In the past, he used to do that and trade prisoners.. What is so different in this incident?

Furthermore with every post you make you show your bias and inability to come to term with well known facts that you CHOOSE to ignore. I think that the Israelis have definately overreacted and that they should not destroy so much of Lebanon as they have but I understand that they were the ones that were provoked into doing so. If Lebanon had disarmed Hezbollah when the Israelis left southern Lebanon in 2000 instead of letting them arm up we wouldn't have the problem right now.

Provoked? Let them, I don't really care.. All what happens is more death to more sides. Knowing that Israel is a goverment, and Hesbullah isn't, and that Israel will make no use of such a war, I just wonder why make a so stupid decision? Oh, and if a young child slaps a big adult, does the adult have the right to kill the child? And if he does, do we blame the child?


Bear in mind in your debate with Redleg is with someone who was against the US protecting Israel with it's veto power. He's being much more objective than you and provides respected sources to points instead of just irrational emotional arguments that you provide.
Respected suorces? Maybe, but from your own prespective. But what's annoying about Redleg is that he argues every word just for the heck of arguing it.. He might even argue it and be way off it, but man.. He just needs to quote it all doesn't he?!

I suggest you review your standpoint and try first of all read what's being provided here with a more objective viewpoint before you reply next time. As of now your not contributing to a healthy debate at all but merely adding emotion without logic.

Thanks for the advice. Will do.

[A.Saturnus]

Release them or we will turn back the clock 20 years in Lebanon.

Spoken like a true terrorist.

[Reenk Roink]

Israel is still doing some serious whoop-assin' today!!! Get some!!!:2thumbsup:

Yes they certainly are...

Hezbollah is doing it's share of "whoop-assin'", but since they are firing at less populated areas and have much inferior technology, it's not as good as Israel. Make no mistake though, they're trying for more "whoop-assin'"...

Pretty soon, Israel will outdo the 9-11 "whoop-assin'"...

And if they keep going as they are, they'll outdo the "whoop-assin'" we did in Iraq...

"whoop-assin'" = killing civilians...

[Redleg]

Basically, all the "sources" go back to one millitary side, so why would you believe one and ignore the other? (I do believe in Hesbullah source, and you do believe in the Israeli one.. This leading us to what?)

The sources I use come from both sides of the equation - I read multiple sources to include Al J, and the Jordan Times.




Examples..?! Really, you should answer questions I don't ask, maybe you should post them as infos rather than as answers.

An answer is an information - information is an answer. If you don't want to hear an answer then don't ask the question. I am under no obligation to answer the way that you wish one to answer.



An opinion is far from judging wheather a thing is "correct" or "incorrect" without qualifications to do so.

Again you are incorrect - one can make judgement calls anytime one desires.




Links?! And noo.. On the TV around here I havent.


I don't watch television news - I read multiple sources of information easily found on the web. The links are available for you to research.



Still the point stands.. What is the percent of "releases" without persons from the other side as well?

Provide information on two - an internet search can easily discover the answer for yourself. A political concession is not a trade - for instance the one in 2005 was a good well gesture to the new leader of the PA.

It seems your point has been defeat and you refuse to acknowledge it...



It is resistance, not terrorism. So no, the 'mainly for cash' statement doesn't apply here.

Then your initial statement is indeed false..



Respected suorces? Maybe, but from your own prespective. But what's annoying about Redleg is that he argues every word just for the heck of arguing it.. He might even argue it and be way off it, but man.. He just needs to quote it all doesn't he?!

Again incorrect - when you use factual information versus made up emotional appeal arguements you will find that I don't argue every word. Just ask Aenlic and a few others. Emotional appeal arguements are their own refutation.

[Husar]

Nope, pick one and I will get ya the reason. (Though, Prophet Mohammed has only made ones against other tribes, that always have started the agression against him, just to faint Islam when it is small still, because they all didn't accep the idea of "equality").
So Islam strikes back when provoked?
So does Israel, where is the problem?
Muhammed started a war about a beheaded emissary.
Israel starts a war about two "kidnapped" soldiers and 8 dead soldiers.
Again, where is the problem?
One could say they are following what you call the "principle of Islam".

[Tribesman]

Israel is still doing some serious whoop-assin' today!!! Get some!!!
Yep they have definately improved , this time it was only some ordinary vehicles carrying civilians, mainly women and children , that Israel had ordered to leave their homes .
Last time they managed to do the same to an ambulance full of women and kids , followed up by a UN base full of sheltering civilians.
See they is definately getting better :dizzy2:

So Dave , with their serious whoop-assin how many terrorists have they managed to kill so far ? 3 isn't it , so that is 1 less than the number of soldiers they lost when the tank hit a mine , 1 less than the number of sailors they lost when the ship got attacked , 4 less than the number of soldiers they lost in general fighting , and who knows how many less than the number they lost when their FAC bunker got blasted . :no:
But hey I suppse some of the 100+ plus civilians they whoop-assed might have been terrorists , and the kids could have been future terrorits , I suppose the women could even potentialy have given birth in the future to future potential terrorists . Hoo-ray for whoop-ass::skull:

[JAG]

Israel have a lot to answer for I am afraid and some of us need to get our heads out of our arses and get real with the situation and start sorting the Middle East problem out, or we are going to go back to the (even) badder days, if we are not there already.

The militants have a lot to answer for I am afraid and some of us need to get our heads out of our arses and get real with the situation and start sorting the Middle East problem out, or we are going to go back to the (even) badder days, if we are not there already.

We are all to blame for the problem and it is about time we started seriously sorting it, man could we not see this coming?

[Reenk Roink]

Here's a show of Israeli "whoop-assin'" for Fox News...

Or should I say, at Fox News...

"whoop-assin'" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ar0jRu5fDZw&search=Israel%20Fox)

[Perplexed]

Serves Fox right.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Well JAG, what do we do?

And I mean that seriously. I can see no real end to the conflict that doesn't leave one or both sides gone. Or the end of the world, in one form or another. What can the wider world do? Neither side's leaders really want compromise anymore.

[Ronin]

Israel is still doing some serious whoop-assin' today!!! Get some!!!:2thumbsup:

yes...amazing...lovely.....


I´m really tired of this crap...from both sides.....I just wish we´d all step back....get out popcorn and watch as both sides "whoop-ass" eachother into non-existance....it´s the only thing garanteed to stop this thing....also make sure that jerusalem is destroyed....that way there is nothing left to fight for anymore....no one gets to keep it....no go back to your rooms and think about the bad boys you´ve been....


idiots....:wall:

[yesdachi]

It is the principle of Islam: If you leave us in peace, we leave you in peace.

Yep, and in principal communism works. In reality people bend their religion into whatever they want and to millions of “misguided” people, dangerous people unwilling to waver on their convictions; I am viewed as an infidel.

[Leet Eriksson]

Muhammed started a war about a beheaded emissary.

What logic is that?

Ghengis Khan destroyed the khawarzm empire becuase of 3 beheaded emissaries too?

Oh wait, you know what, when you behead a factions emissary, that faction didn't start the war, you did. ~;p

[Dâriûsh]

I wonder how many civilians will receive a whoop-assin' today.

[PanzerJaeger]

Serves Fox right.


~:rolleyes:

[Pannonian]

How about my preferred solution of cleaning our hands of the whole thing? Seal the area off. No travel into or from Israel and Palestine. If any EU citizen travels there, their citizenship revoked and barred from returning (we don't want any more Sidiq Khans, thank you). No trade with either. No aid for either. Any EU citizen who violates these arrangements to have their citizenship taken away and deported. No bias in our treatment for both sides, for we won't be treating with either of them. The whole area is a mess, and we want nothing to do with it.

[Dâriûsh]

I can actually almost see Syria getting involved in this. :sweatdrop:

[Husar]

What logic is that?

Ghengis Khan destroyed the khawarzm empire becuase of 3 beheaded emissaries too?

Oh wait, you know what, when you behead a factions emissary, that faction didn't start the war, you did. ~;p
Well, that´s the general custom, but I never said I like that custom, did I?
I also didn´t say the mongols were nice people.
It´s all your fault anyway, I´m missing your intelligent input on MSN. ~;p

[x-dANGEr]

The sources I use come from both sides of the equation - I read multiple sources to include Al J, and the Jordan Times.So you take what you like from one source and add it to what you like from the other?

An answer is an information - information is an answer. If you don't want to hear an answer then don't ask the question. I am under no obligation to answer the way that you wish one to answer.
You seem to confuse the "way" you answer with "what" you answer to.

Again you are incorrect - one can make judgement calls anytime one desires.

But he can't force them on others. Just like you did right now: "Again you are incorrect", well I don't believe I am. ~:rolleyes:

I don't watch television news - I read multiple sources of information easily found on the web. The links are available for you to research.
Oohh.. Maybe that is your problem ~;) (Basically, most "arabic" news sites in English are quite briefed, and even sometimes mistaked..)

Provide information on two - an internet search can easily discover the answer for yourself. A political concession is not a trade - for instance the one in 2005 was a good well gesture to the new leader of the PA.

How many "political concession"-s have been made?

My definition of terrorism: "A term used to cover the whole terrorizing organisations in old Europe, and is now used to disgrace resistance by calling it so."

Then your initial statement is indeed false..

Hmm no, you're incorrect (Using your own game against ya ~;) ).

Again incorrect - when you use factual information versus made up emotional appeal arguements you will find that I don't argue every word. Just ask Aenlic and a few others. Emotional appeal arguements are their own refutation.

Nah.. You're incorrect. (Funny, I'm starting to like this!)

So Islam strikes back when provoked?
So does Israel, where is the problem?
Muhammed started a war about a beheaded emissary.


What logic is that?

Ghengis Khan destroyed the khawarzm empire becuase of 3 beheaded emissaries too?

Oh wait, you know what, when you behead a factions emissary, that faction didn't start the war, you did.

How about my preferred solution of cleaning our hands of the whole thing? Seal the area off. No travel into or from Israel and Palestine. If any EU citizen travels there, their citizenship revoked and barred from returning (we don't want any more Sidiq Khans, thank you). No trade with either. No aid for either. Any EU citizen who violates these arrangements to have their citizenship taken away and deported. No bias in our treatment for both sides, for we won't be treating with either of them. The whole area is a mess, and we want nothing to do with it.
Well, if you give the Palestinian the weapons you once gave to Israel (Including the Nukes), that'd be cool with me.

[Pannonian]

Well, if you give the Palestinian the weapons you once gave to Israel (Including the Nukes), that'd be cool with me.
You don't understand. We don't want anything more to do with this, because neither side takes any notice of what we say. We have given Palestine our support for goodness knows how long (most recently to bail out the PA), but you completely ignore us. Since we don't get anything from it now, there is no reason for us to intervene any longer. What's past is irrelevant. We don't gain anything from history, but only from what you offer us now and in the future (nothing).

And if you try to drag us back in, you will discover that the IDF isn't a patch on the damage the British, French and German militaries can do. There is still a nasty jingoistic streak running through British and French society, and if you remove the liberals who hold them in check you may find yourself hankering for the good old days of the Israelis.

[x-dANGEr]

History is the reason of future?

I will forget about the past, for that will drive us into mazes never ending.

[Redleg]

So you take what you like from one source and add it to what you like from the other?

Nope I use both to attempt to sort out the facts from the baised reporting.



You seem to confuse the "way" you answer with "what" you answer to.


Not at all - however it seems that it confuses you.



But he can't force them on others. Just like you did right now: "Again you are incorrect", well I don't believe I am. ~:rolleyes:

Who is forcing whom. Opinion's are just statements. You can believe you are correct even when the facts show otherwise. This is how extremists get their cannon fodder and their support.



Oohh.. Maybe that is your problem ~;) (Basically, most "arabic" news sites in English are quite briefed, and even sometimes mistaked..)


This is why I use multiple sources. One can sort out what is fact by using multiple sources to see which parts of the story is consistent. Brief reports often contain more factual information. The longer the report the more baised the story becomes. Or in the case of the Middle-East the more propaganda it contains. This is true of Israel and this is true for Palenstine sources.



How many "political concession"-s have been made?


Research the answer yourself - it might enlighten you to your own baised views and the false information that has been feed to you by the supporters of terrorism.




Hmm no, you're incorrect (Using your own game against ya ~;) ).


Are you now attempting to compound your error by claiming you did not state this - or are you guilty of history revision?

Those in Europe fought mainly for cash! The resistance organisations fight for freedom?



Nah.. You're incorrect. (Funny, I'm starting to like this!)

Are you attempting to state that emotional appeal is not its own refutation? You might want to check out what an emotional appeal arguement is all about.



Well, if you give the Palestinian the weapons you once gave to Israel (Including the Nukes), that'd be cool with me.

Who is to give the Palestinian's weapons? Again who aided Israel in developing Nuclear Weapons? You might want to think before responding.

[x-dANGEr]

Not at all - however it seems that it confuses you.Incorrect.

Who is forcing whom. Opinion's are just statements. You can believe you are correct even when the facts show otherwise. This is how extremists get their cannon fodder and their support.
"You can believe you are correct.."

This is why I use multiple sources. One can sort out what is fact by using multiple sources to see which parts of the story is consistent. Brief reports often contain more factual information. The longer the report the more baised the story becomes. Or in the case of the Middle-East the more propaganda it contains. This is true of Israel and this is true for Palenstine sources. I just want to bring in an example, and you tell me what's biased and what is not:

The west says (Some link by an ORG-er have been given) that the Israeli Destroyer was attacked by a no-pilot airplane dozened with explosives (To not generalise, I'd say some sources), while the sources I get my info from say it was attacked by a direct rocket attack.. Now, who's right? (Of course the second one, since I think it would easily counter the first one)


Research the answer yourself - it might enlighten you to your own baised views and the false information that has been feed to you by the supporters of terrorism.
No need to.. I am sure it would be minimum.


Are you now attempting to compound your error by claiming you did not state this - or are you guilty of history revision?
I'm just trying to state my opinion that you're wrong (In saying that my sentence/definition was utterly wrong). If you go back to hose I defined it, I said "terrorist organisation".. Now if you consider the French Resistance a terrorist organistaion, that doesn't mean a flaw in my definition, but a flaw in yours.

Are you attempting to state that emotional appeal is not its own refutation? You might want to check out what an emotional appeal arguement is all about.

I'm just trying to state my opinion that you're wrong (You like to talk bla bla a lot).

Again who aided Israel in developing Nuclear Weapons? You might want to think before responding.

The UK.

[Devastatin Dave]

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/739352.html
Of course this won't happen and if it does it will have the same impact as baking a turd, covering it with icing, and calling it a cake.
So in the Sudan, millions died and Kofi doesn't do diddly, but Israel finally takes the fight to the enemy and Kofi wants to stop it. Typical UN. So should the UN go in or should it do what it does best; talk endlessly until both sides fall asleep because of Kofi's hypnotizing monotone rhetoric?

[Redleg]

Incorrect.

Copying is the best form of flattery - but denying you were confused is a little late.



"You can believe you are correct.."

So your attempting to state that the extremists don't use information and propaganda to recruit their cannon fodder? You might want to research some more then.



I just want to bring in an example, and you tell me what's biased and what is not:

The west says (Some link by an ORG-er have been given) that the Israeli Destroyer was attacked by a no-pilot airplane dozened with explosives (To not generalise, I'd say some sources), while the sources I get my info from say it was attacked by a direct rocket attack.. Now, who's right? (Of course the second one, since I think it would easily counter the first one)


Your behind, Israeli intelligence along with several western intelligence agnecies are claiming an anti-ship missile from Iran was used. This could go with the direct rocket attack scenerio that is being mentioned by Hezabollah sources.



No need to.. I am sure it would be minimum.


Then you must also concur that Israeli sources contain a minimum of propaganda and disinformation.

Both sides use false information all the time to sway others to their side of the arguement.



I'm just trying to state my opinion that you're wrong (In saying that my sentence/definition was utterly wrong). If you go back to hose I defined it, I said "terrorist organisation".. Now if you consider the French Resistance a terrorist organistaion, that doesn't mean a flaw in my definition, but a flaw in yours.

Nice try but not good enough - quibbling over your failure is just that.



I'm just trying to state my opinion that you're wrong (You like to talk bla bla a lot).

So you agree your use of heavy emotional appeal arguements are their own refutation?



The UK.

From FAS. Pprobably the best source for information on any Nation's Nuclear Weapons program available on the Web, and about as neutral as you can get toward nations - this group detests nuclear weapons - they have absolutely no agenda to report false information concerning nations.


On 3 October 1957, France and Israel signed a revised agreement calling for France to build a 24 MWt reactor (although the cooling systems and waste facilities were designed to handle three times that power) and, in protocols that were not committed to paper, a chemical reprocessing plant. This complex was constructed in secret, and outside the IAEA inspection regime, by French and Israeli technicians at Dimona, in the Negev desert under the leadership of Col. Manes Pratt of the IDF Ordinance Corps.

Both the scale of the project and the secrecy involved made the construction of Dimona a massive undertaking. A new intelligence agency, the Office of Science Liasons,(LEKEM) was created to provide security and intelligence for the project. At the height construction, some 1,500 Israelis some French workers were employed building Dimona. To maintain secrecy, French customs officials were told that the largest of the reactor components, such as the reactor tank, were part of a desalinization plant bound for Latin America. In addition, after buying heavy water from Norway on the condition that it not be transferred to a third country, the French Air Force secretly flew as much as four tons of the substance to Israel.

Trouble arose in May 1960, when France began to pressure Israel to make the project public and to submit to international inspections of the site, threatening to withhold the reactor fuel unless they did. President de Gaulle was concerned that the inevitable scandal following any revelations about French assistance with the project, especially the chemical reprocessing plant, would have negative repercussions for France's international position, already on shaky ground because of its war in Algeria.

At a subsequent meeting with Ben-Gurion, de Gaulle offered to sell Israel fighter aircraft in exchange for stopping work on the reprocessing plant, and came away from the meeting convinced that the matter was closed. It was not. Over the next few months, Israel worked out a compromise. France would supply the uranium and components already placed on order and would not insist on international inspections. In return, Israel would assure France that they had no intention of making atomic weapons, would not reprocess any plutonium, and would reveal the existence of the reactor, which would be completed without French assistance. In reality, not much changed - French contractors finished work on the reactor and reprocessing plant, uranium fuel was delivered and the reactor went critical in 1964.


http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/israel/nuke/

So again attempting to blame the UK shows that your arguement is incorrect.

[x-dANGEr]

You seem to see a little bit beyond words, even when I put nothing there.


Copying is the best form of flattery - but denying you were confused is a little late.

Not really. What was this point about again?

So your attempting to state that the extremists don't use information and propaganda to recruit their cannon fodder? You might want to research some more then.
No I don't. But you were claiming that I am a part of that cannon fodder, which I don't agree too.

Your behind, Israeli intelligence along with several western intelligence agnecies are claiming an anti-ship missile from Iran was used. This could go with the direct rocket attack scenerio that is being mentioned by Hezabollah sources.
Oh, the Iran thing lol.. I take it you don't believe them do you? Since you say "claiming".. Good.

Then you must also concur that Israeli sources contain a minimum of propaganda and disinformation.
No I musn't. I'm talking about the trades, not their creditibility (Israel)

Nice try but not good enough - quibbling over your failure is just that.You're incorrect. I tried to simplfy it so you can make out for your understanding failure.

So you agree your use of heavy emotional appeal arguements are their own refutation?No I don't. (I don't know what "refutation" means)

From FAS. Pprobably the best source for information on any Nation's Nuclear Weapons program available on the Web, and about as neutral as you can get toward nations - this group detests nuclear weapons - they have absolutely no agenda to report false information concerning nations.
I didn't know for sure who was it..

At any cost, I stand corrected. But, this still poses an asnwer to you:

Again who aided Israel in developing Nuclear Weapons?

[Husar]

They should move into Lebanon, Sudan and Palestine as well.
And they should not forget to take real ammunition with them.
Then they should help to remove foreign influence from Lebanon, make Palestine it´s own state, tell Israel to give them water, release the prisoners and tell the terrorists to stop attacks. In sudan they should simply, erm, kill all bad guys [new process, widen Monkeysphere.......done] erm, I mean they should kill the really bad guys and help the children soldiers.
Once that is complete, other rebuilding steps can be taken in africa and the Middle East.
So much about Husi´s guide to world peace.

An important point is also the opinion of the people of the country you send those troops to. If those people didn´t suffer enough, there is some chance they might see the foreign soldiers as occupants. Especially the middle east didn´t really like foreign soldiers so far. We might see a UN vs rebels war in Lebanon, only if the UN takes real ammunition though.

[Redleg]

You seem to see a little bit beyond words, even when I put nothing there.

Maybe, maybe not - but be careful of making such claims when your just as guilty of doing such.



Not really. What was this point about again?

Another quibble



No I don't. But you were claiming that I am a part of that cannon fodder, which I don't agree too.

Did I make such a claim?

or did you assume that I was speaking directly of you?



Oh, the Iran thing lol.. I take it you don't believe them do you? Since you say "claiming".. Good.

Until the evidence is confirmed its only a claim. The explosive residue will determine if the missile was from Iran or if it was just a rocket made by Hezabollah.

Now there is evidence the missiles being used to strike Haifa are of Iran design and manafacture. Both by the claims of Hezabolla itself - they released that they were firing Raad 1, Raad 2, and Raad 3. The picture shown in the newscaste is one that looks very similiar to the Shinian 1 (Spelling) missile of Iran design and manafacture.



No I musn't. I'm talking about the trades, not their creditibility (Israel)

Are you attempting to change what you stated to mean something else, because you misunderstood my comment? The issue that I was mentioning in that comment was information, not just trades.



You're incorrect. I tried to simplfy it so you can make out for your understanding failure.

A quibble it is indeed - the error was yours and attempts to change it are only quibbles. You made an attempt at rivisioning history and you were called on it. Any explanation otherwise is only a quibble, and flys in the face of what you stated.



No I don't. (I don't know what "refutation" means)

Then look it up -



I didn't know for sure who was it..


That is a common mistake that you are making in this thread - emotional appeal is its own refutation.



At any cost, I stand corrected. But, this still poses an asnwer to you:

FAS provides that answer - if you stand corrected by the document that it was not the UK, you should of seen where FAS provides the answer concerning the nation that provided the base assistance for Israel's development of nuclear weapons. It also clearly states what nation failed to request any enforcement concerning Israel's violation of the Non Profliation Agreements.

I am not going to educate you on the nation - but I will point you in the correct direction by refering you to the FAS website once again. If I just tell you, you will not discover for yourself that you have fallen victim to false information and propaganda of both sides.

[x-dANGEr]

Maybe, maybe not - but be careful of making such claims when your just as guilty of doing such.
You claim that all my arguments are based on emmotional appeal, and then you say I see beyond words.. Something's wrong here..

Did I make such a claim?

or did you assume that I was speaking directly of you?

Weren't you?

Research the answer yourself - it might enlighten you to your own baised views and the false information that has been feed to you by the supporters of terrorism.


Until the evidence is confirmed its only a claim. The explosive residue will determine if the missile was from Iran or if it was just a rocket made by Hezabollah.

Now there is evidence the missiles being used to strike Haifa are of Iran design and manafacture. Both by the claims of Hezabolla itself - they released that they were firing Raad 1, Raad 2, and Raad 3. The picture shown in the newscaste is one that looks very similiar to the Shinian 1 (Spelling) missile of Iran design and manafacture.
How do you define manufacture?

Are you attempting to change what you stated to mean something else, because you misunderstood my comment? The issue that I was mentioning in that comment was information, not just trades.
What I stated is only about the captives' trades. You started "quibbling" and getting us far from the point.

A quibble it is indeed - the error was yours and attempts to change it are only quibbles. You made an attempt at rivisioning history and you were called on it. Any explanation otherwise is only a quibble, and flys in the face of what you stated.
No error was mine. IN the original definition I gave to it, I said "terrorizing organisations", and I don't think that applies to any resistance.

Then look it up
I just did.

emotional appeal is its own refutation.

I'm not claiming that I do not agree to this description of my arguments, I simply don't agree.

FAS provides that answer - if you stand corrected by the document that it was not the UK, you should of seen where FAS provides the answer concerning the nation that provided the base assistance for Israel's development of nuclear weapons. It also clearly states what nation failed to request any enforcement concerning Israel's violation of the Non Profliation Agreements.

I am not going to educate you on the nation - but I will point you in the correct direction by refering you to the FAS website once again. If I just tell you, you will not discover for yourself that you have fallen victim to false information and propaganda of both sides.

Through what I read, I found nothing. Though, I know that a whole lot of Arabic countries requested the Israel be enforced concerning it's violation of the agreement. Some 3-4 years ago.

[cunobelinus]

Do people believe this attack on liban is the start of a bigger war or just a small war that should sizzle out .

[x-dANGEr]

It can go either way..

[Somebody Else]

Situation seems quite simple to me. Disregarding any issues about the foundation of each state - all past history now - the current generation are only carping on about it due to prejudices handed down by their forefathers. This is a conflict between, broadly speaking, a positive organisation, and a negative one. One seeks to maintain it's own state, even willing to concede territory in order to promote peace. The other dedicated to the destruction of this state.

Just because one side is weaker, doesn't preclude it's ability to be an aggressor. Kind of like short people.

Thinking back in history (I am an historian after all). There are a couple of instances where a powerful nation successfully dealt with insurgency, and generated lasting peace (for at least a couple of generations). You aren't going to like the methods though. First example: France, or rather, Gaul. Caesar 'pacified' Gaul Roman style - lots of killing, cutting off of hands etc. and then encouraging assimiliation with Roman culture. The result? A province that was peaceful, contributed to Roman society, culture and government for several hundred years. Second example, India. After the mutiny, we were brutal. Granted, the Indians later had a revolution - a couple of hundred years later, but in a civilised manner - peacefully and progressing into the largest democracy in the world.

Now, I'm not saying that the Israelis should lay waste to all and sundry; but then, nor should they roll over and take it.

So, quite clearly, my opinion lies in supporting the Israeli state - quite possibly influenced by my exasperation with what seems to be a vast horde of nihilists hiding behind a book.

[Redleg]

You claim that all my arguments are based on emmotional appeal, and then you say I see beyond words.. Something's wrong here..

Yep - emotional appeal.



Weren't you?


Which one? It will help you understand what I was actually saying.



How do you define manufacture?

Exactly the way it is defined in Websters.



What I stated is only about the captives' trades. You started "quibbling" and getting us far from the point.

So showing you that there was trades, no trades, and concession releases seem to fall out the window because you wish to maintain the illusion and baised that states there is never a release of prisoners without a trade.

Does someone have a problem reviewing information outside of their own paridiagms(SP)?



No error was mine. IN the original definition I gave to it, I said "terrorizing organisations", and I don't think that applies to any resistance.


So I am indeed correct your orginial statement about the the West fighting only for cash was indeed false. To remind us both of your statement

Those in Europe fought mainly for cash! The resistance organisations fight for freedom?



I just did.

Good



I'm not claiming that I do not agree to this description of my arguments, I simply don't agree.


Emotional appeal is its own refutation.



Through what I read, I found nothing. Though, I know that a whole lot of Arabic countries requested the Israel be enforced concerning it's violation of the agreement. Some 3-4 years ago.

France supplied the Technology and even some of the scientists and material in developing Israel's nuclear generators. Israel developed their own nuclear weapons from this start. Most likely with the knowledge that one has been developed before enabled them to speed up their own ability to make nuclear weapons. The United States failed to make any waves about Israel's possible development of nuclear weapons when the US first learned of the violations by Israel back in the 1960s and into the 1970's. This is all contained in the FAS document and yes even the quote alreadly provided in this thread.

[yesdachi]

Do people believe this attack on liban is the start of a bigger war or just a small war that should sizzle out .
It is already part of a larger war, the war on terrorism. No sizzle out in sight.

[Pannonian]

Situation seems quite simple to me. Disregarding any issues about the foundation of each state - all past history now - the current generation are only carping on about it due to prejudices handed down by their forefathers. This is a conflict between, broadly speaking, a positive organisation, and a negative one. One seeks to maintain it's own state, even willing to concede territory in order to promote peace. The other dedicated to the destruction of this state.

Just because one side is weaker, doesn't preclude it's ability to be an aggressor. Kind of like short people.

Thinking back in history (I am an historian after all). There are a couple of instances where a powerful nation successfully dealt with insurgency, and generated lasting peace (for at least a couple of generations). You aren't going to like the methods though. First example: France, or rather, Gaul. Caesar 'pacified' Gaul Roman style - lots of killing, cutting off of hands etc. and then encouraging assimiliation with Roman culture. The result? A province that was peaceful, contributed to Roman society, culture and government for several hundred years. Second example, India. After the mutiny, we were brutal. Granted, the Indians later had a revolution - a couple of hundred years later, but in a civilised manner - peacefully and progressing into the largest democracy in the world.

You might want to look at a more recent example closer to home, Northern Ireland.



Now, I'm not saying that the Israelis should lay waste to all and sundry; but then, nor should they roll over and take it.

So, quite clearly, my opinion lies in supporting the Israeli state - quite possibly influenced by my exasperation with what seems to be a vast horde of nihilists hiding behind a book.
The main Palestinian terror groups are secular. The only book they're hding behind is the latest A-Z of Israel/Palestine (latest because of the constant creep of Israeli settlements).

It's funny how people talk of kidnapping Israeli soldiers as an act of war, but they ignore the main cause of war through history, land disputes. We fought a war against Argentina when they claimed a piece of British land as their own. IIRC we weren't the aggressors.

[Somebody Else]

You might want to look at a more recent example closer to home, Northern Ireland.

Not quite the same. We didn't say, for example, raze entire towns and enslave all the women and children having executed all the men.

A limited approach does not work. Kind of like wind on a fire - a strong wind on a weak flame blows it out. But blow too softly, or too late, and embers will become a fire, a fire will become a firestorm.


The main Palestinian terror groups are secular. The only book they're hding behind is the latest A-Z of Israel/Palestine (latest because of the constant creep of Israeli settlements).

It's funny how people talk of kidnapping Israeli soldiers as an act of war, but they ignore the main cause of war through history, land disputes. We fought a war against Argentina when they claimed a piece of British land as their own. IIRC we weren't the aggressors.


Here I'll admit, I was being rather general - and openly admitting a slight prejudice - I don't know - there's three major conflicts going on at the moment, all with a common factor.

Yes, human greed is the most common cause for aggression - in all walks of life. But religion is, for some, a very convenient excuse.

[Tribesman]

Not quite the same. We didn't say, for example, raze entire towns and enslave all the women and children having executed all the men.

Not during the recent episode , but they certainly did previously . Though of course they didn't kill all the men , they would just decide what proportion of a towns male inhabitants would be executed .
Now what is the name of the island where they shipped people off to work the plantations ?
Also you might want to rethink your comments about India , they are contrary to fact , or do you find the slaughter of millions and still ongoing killing a civilised peaceful manner .

(I am an historian after all)
Really ????? perhaps you should study a little harder .
You can start by finding out which proportions of male inhabitants of which towns/cities were chosen to be executed ,then which was the last town to be razed (which isn't that long ago actually ) . Then can you find the name of the carribean island the Irish were sent to .
History is fun isn't it , its good to learn .:2thumbsup:

[Somebody Else]

B](I am an historian after all)[/B]
Really ????? perhaps you should study a little harder .
You can start by finding out which proportions of male inhabitants of which towns/cities were chosen to be executed ,then which was the last town to be razed (which isn't that long ago actually ) . Then can you find the name of the carribean island the Irish were sent to .
History is fun isn't it , its good to learn .:2thumbsup:

Ancient historian. The Irish, quite frankly, are of little interest to me. If you want examples in the Roman empire or Empire, do ask. As a taster, the Nervii in Gaul, (and to prove that the area can live peacefully) Jerusalem after Titus.

[Tribesman]

Thats OK Somebody, just thought I would point out that you were not using very good examples with Ireland and India .
So now then , the Romans , whatever happened to them ?
I wonder if in a few millenia historians will be looking at the wall to in the Middle east that is supposed to keep the barbarians at bay and saying "what a wonderful feat of engineering" ?~;)

[Somebody Else]

The Romans had an empire that lasted 500 years (Augustus onwards). Or, if you want, there were people who called themselves Roman for 2000 years (Founding of Rome to the fall of Constantinople).

They are the basis of our legal system. Their military organisational and training techniques provide inspiration centuries after their demise.

I just hope in a few millenia historians have a wall to look at, because the way things seem to be going at the moment, they'll have a the relics of a novel form of glass production to look at.

[Tribesman]

Just wondering Somebody , since you refer to peace after Titus , you know kill them enslave them and destroy the area .
How is it that they came back on a far wider scale and depopulated large parts of the roman empire by slaughtering roman citizens , didn't they get the message ?

And they rose up again after that didn't they .

Some people never learn do they .
Apparently they are back again now and none too happy at the moment as it happens.

Funny thing that genocide isn't it , you have to do it right and make sure you get all of them . If not then you are only building problems for the future .


I just hope in a few millenia historians have a wall to look at, because the way things seem to be going at the moment, they'll have a the relics of a novel form of glass production to look at.
Hopefully saner heads will prevail .

[Somebody Else]

Gotta love the good old pax Romana.

N.B. Up until Constantine, religion was not generally an issue under Roman rule (Except the druids... nasty seditious human-sacrificing people that they were. The human sacrifice was distasteful - but their propensity for spreading dissent was the main reason the Romans went to such lengths to crush them)

Also, try as I might, I can't think of any occasion when Judean Zeolots embarked on an empire-wide slaughter of Roman citizens... I will give you that there were 2 more revolts after Titus (well, one set of riots and a major revolt). '580,000 Jews (mass civilian casualties), 50 fortified towns and 985 villages razed.' in Bar Kokhba’s revolt, According to Cassius Dio via Wikipedia. They were not exterminated, but nor were they let off lightly. I don't see any mention of a Jewish revolt after that...

Basically, what I'm saying, is that people are thick. And sometimes, something heavy is required to hammer the message home. But as long as they feel that they can act with impunity, people will. Why co-operate when you don't have to? Much like training an animal, people as a whole need to be forced to behave in a certain way before they do so voluntarily.

Gods I despise the human race.

[Tribesman]

Also, try as I might, I can't think of any occasion when Judean Zeolots embarked on an empire-wide slaughter of Roman citizens...
I didn't say empire wide , it just reached from modern Iraq all the way across to modern Libya , oh and a little hop across the sea to Cyprus .
See .....wider-scale .
It was the second one not the Star one .

[Pannonian]

You might want to look at a more recent example closer to home, Northern Ireland.

Not quite the same. We didn't say, for example, raze entire towns and enslave all the women and children having executed all the men.

Precisely. Northern Ireland shows that defeating insurgencies (and the Provisional IRA were among the best) is possible without using extreme brutality. It takes a lot of patience and tolerance (and money), but it's possible. In the long run, it's probably cheaper than the half and half solution favoured by moralists.



A limited approach does not work. Kind of like wind on a fire - a strong wind on a weak flame blows it out. But blow too softly, or too late, and embers will become a fire, a fire will become a firestorm.

A poor analogy, you might as well use a direct description. As Mao Zedong and other experts on the matter have recognised, an insurgency lives among its people. People are drawn to the idea of the insurgency. Therefore defeating the insurgency involves either extinguishing the idea or the people who are drawn to it. Extinguishing the people means depopulating the danger area, either killing, moving or otherwise suppressing the relevant part of the population - genocide or the threat of is good if you choose this option. Extinguishing the idea means either suppressing the idea, feasible before modern communications but not now, or providing an alternative, which is what the British did in Northern Ireland.

You can even mix and match to your taste, as they are not mutually exclusive, although one does tend to act against the other. However, forever threatening the population while not giving them any realistic alternative definitely doesn't work.



Here I'll admit, I was being rather general - and openly admitting a slight prejudice - I don't know - there's three major conflicts going on at the moment, all with a common factor.

Yes, human greed is the most common cause for aggression - in all walks of life. But religion is, for some, a very convenient excuse.
The basic cause of the Israel-Palestine conflict is the non-existence of a viable Palestine, and the unlife of Palestinians. The British solved Northern Ireland by integrating the population into the British mainstream, thereby making insurgency much less attractive, giving the insurgents a realistic political alternative to violence, and accepting the moral contradictions of a war in name and peace in reality.

FWIW, Sinn Fein still aims to drive the British out of the island of Ireland, but now do so via exclusively political means, and they are more concerned with other matters now they are in government in many councils across Northern Ireland. If the Israelis were smart and less concerned with macho posturing, they would seek to rehabilitate Hamas in this manner. History shows the Israelis, like their American sponsors, to be too bound by moral opposites to do anything of the sort.

[Somebody Else]

The non-life of the Palestinians. As I said earlier, the current generation is not one that was around when there was a state of Palestine. They should move on.

And if this seems cavalier, and that the virtue of having ancestors that once lived in a place entails a right to live there regardless of later claims grants the Palestinians the right to live there. Well, then. Sorry, but the Israelis got there first. Up until 1900 years ago or so. When they were ejected by the superpower of the time, as the Palestinians were ejected by the superpower of their time. But then, following that logic, the USA should be evacuated by all but the native americans. The Scots should go back to Ireland. Non-aboriginals should leave Australia. Etc. etc.

This is a farcical assumption.

Fact is, Israel is a sovereign state, currently extant, recognised as such by the rest of the world. Therefore it has every right to defend itself against attacks upon it's sovereignity - whether they be forceful or more insidious.

Hezbollah et al strike me as something akin to the petulant little child lashing out in a temper tantrum because it doesn't get it's way.

Anyway - we seemed to be getting a little off topic somewhere along the line.

[Pannonian]

The non-life of the Palestinians. As I said earlier, the current generation is not one that was around when there was a state of Palestine. They should move on.

There is a state of Palestine. This state is guaranteed by the UN, and is even recognised by Israel. It held free elections recently, and in a surprise result (not least to the victors) elected a Hamas government.



And if this seems cavalier, and that the virtue of having ancestors that once lived in a place entails a right to live there regardless of later claims grants the Palestinians the right to live there. Well, then. Sorry, but the Israelis got there first. Up until 1900 years ago or so. When they were ejected by the superpower of the time, as the Palestinians were ejected by the superpower of their time. But then, following that logic, the USA should be evacuated by all but the native americans. The Scots should go back to Ireland. Non-aboriginals should leave Australia. Etc. etc.

This is a farcical assumption.

Fact is, Israel is a sovereign state, currently extant, recognised as such by the rest of the world. Therefore it has every right to defend itself against attacks upon it's sovereignity - whether they be forceful or more insidious.

Palestine also claims that right, but do not have the military or diplomatic muscle to back it up. The UN defined the borders of Israel and Palestine, but war has eaten into that. The PLO recognised that fact, and renegotiated the borders. Israel continues to eat into Palestinian territory by building new settlements and thus bringing more Palestinian territory under Israeli authority, but the west does not regard this as an act of war. More recently, Israel has built a wall which crosses and encloses land that even Israel recognises as Palestinian, but once again the west does not regard this as an act of war. Thatcher sent an expedition to the Falklands when the Argies tried something similar.



Hezbollah et al strike me as something akin to the petulant little child lashing out in a temper tantrum because it doesn't get it's way.

Anyway - we seemed to be getting a little off topic somewhere along the line.
Hezbollah and other anti-Israel groups gain support from the sore that is Israel-Palestine. When talking about the middle east, the Palestinian problem is always on-topic. It is such an obvious injustice, the flourescent pink elephant in the middle of the room, that all Muslims have to do is point and all our illusions of an ethical foreign policy is gone. Whatever their underlying reasons for doing so (and we don't know what they are), they weren't slow to link their cause to that of the Palestinians.

Personally I don't care for any of those in the region. It would be better if the EU sealed off the region, Israel, Palestine, Lebanon and other relevant countries. No travel, no trade, no aid. Ban travel to those areas. If anyone goes there via other countries, bar them from returning to the EU. If anyone manages to return to the EU after having been to those areas, revoke their EU citizenship and deport them. If these middle easterners don't want to listen to us, there is no reason to continue to belabour them with our opinions. And if they insist on continuing this war, then they should at least keep us out of it. And if they want to contribute to this war, then we don't want them here causing trouble. Let them do whatever they want, it's none of our business. And we should do our utmost to keep it from being our business, until they tire of fighting. If they want our advice again there is always the UN in New York. Until then, good bye and good riddance to these troublemakers.

[Somebody Else]

It would please me greatly to seal them all off in some room somewhere to sort it out on their own. However, they happen to be sitting on one of the most interesting pieces of land in the world. (And I'm pretty thankful I managed to visit between intifadahs).

As for Israel continuing to encroach on Palestinian land, one of the first acts of the current head of state was to withdraw from perceived Palestinian territory - of course, this cannot be done immediately - people cannot be moved like cattle - regardless of the past. The wall was built in order to regulate the movement of possible bombers. Do you know what it's like to live in a city where people actually jump if a car backfires? Talks never managed to stop them coming across, strikes didn't, what will?

Anyway. Regardless. What's Hezbollah's involvement pray tell? Are they a concerned third party? In which case why not act through the Lebanese government, of which they are a part, in order to put pressure on the Israelis to concede. Instead, they resort to all they understand. And kidnap. And bomb. Those aren't the acts of an organisation I can imagine anyone wanting anything to deal with.

[Pannonian]

It would please me greatly to seal them all off in some room somewhere to sort it out on their own. However, they happen to be sitting on one of the most interesting pieces of land in the world. (And I'm pretty thankful I managed to visit between intifadahs).

Then wait until it's peaceful again before visiting. One of the London bombers (the ringleader) was radicalised by a trip there, and I'm not inclined to look kindly on others who want to make that trip.



As for Israel continuing to encroach on Palestinian land, one of the first acts of the current head of state was to withdraw from perceived Palestinian territory - of course, this cannot be done immediately - people cannot be moved like cattle - regardless of the past. The wall was built in order to regulate the movement of possible bombers.

They withdrew from Gaza, but they're still on the West Bank. One solution I came up with after discussion on another forum was for the wall to be demolished, the settlers to remain, but for any settlers remaining on what is internationally recognised as Palestinian soil to cease being Israeli but to assume Palestinian citizenship with all its attendant rights and responsibilities, including paying taxes to the PA.

Israel has no legal authority over the West Bank, however you wish to argue it. These lands are internationally recognised as Palestinian. If the settlers want to claim right of habitation, then they must also accept the authority of the legal owner of that land, which is the Palestinian state. If they do not accept that authority, then they are by definition squatters. If they wish to contest that authority with force, then the are by definition invaders, and the Palestinians would be within their rights to ask the UNSC to help them eject them from their land (as happened with Kuwait in 1990).

Read this op-ed from the Hamas PM, and see how it differs from the popular (western) view of Hamas.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/10/AR2006071001108.html



Do you know what it's like to live in a city where people actually jump if a car backfires?

I grew up with the threat of IRA bombs constantly in the background. I'm a regular tube user along the lines and stations that were bombed last July (both the successful and unsuccessful attempts). I'm still slightly edgy around dark skinned people carrying backpacks on trains, especially when approaching Liverpool Street. Does that count?



Talks never managed to stop them coming across, strikes didn't, what will?

The period when Arafat and Rabin were engaged in productive talks was the most peaceful in the past couple of decades, according to Israeli accounts.



Anyway. Regardless. What's Hezbollah's involvement pray tell? Are they a concerned third party? In which case why not act through the Lebanese government, of which they are a part, in order to put pressure on the Israelis to concede. Instead, they resort to all they understand. And kidnap. And bomb. Those aren't the acts of an organisation I can imagine anyone wanting anything to deal with.
One could say the same about the IRA when they bombed Canary Wharf in their last spectacular. Did the British government send in the Harriers? Even better, they sent in Scotland Yard and activated their intelligence network. Even after Omagh we didn't respond with geometrically reciprocal violence, but treated it as a crime to be investigated by the police. Wouldn't you say the UK-IRA relationship is currently healthier than the Israel-Palestine relationship?

[Somebody Else]

Hmm... a solution I've considered in the past would be to declare the area a state solely governed by the UN - governed not by Israelis for the Jews, or Palestine for the Muslims, or... um... Outremer for the Christians - but by mankind for mankind. The same to apply to any other parts of the world where people can't seem to get their heads together. And before ya know it, we'll finally have that one-world government I've been hoping for.

But hey. Humanity is too petty to think that way.

And the difference between the IRA and these Islamic organisations is a case of scale. Whereas one has reasonable demands that can be negotiated with; The other is comprised of absolutists. The IRA's aim, I don't believe, was the annhilation of Great Britain - therefore an agreement could be reached. But how can one negotiate with someone who wants you dissolved?

Also, it's still terrible, but an attack every few days at the height of the troubles... compared to multiple daily attacks at the height of the intifadahs... Not quite the same now is it? As for the tube. Well, I'll admit, I try to avoid it myself. People stink. But you'll forgive me for being a little callous about a mere 52 deaths - when compared to this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_committed_during_the_Al-Aqsa_Intifada). Make no mistake, I judge 7/7 to be a terrible incident, but for that one incident (ignoring the damp squib a couple of weeks later) to be on an equal footing with what happens elsewhere? That's just a little to self-concerned.

[Pannonian]

Hmm... a solution I've considered in the past would be to declare the area a state solely governed by the UN - governed not by Israelis for the Jews, or Palestine for the Muslims, or... um... Outremer for the Christians - but by mankind for mankind. The same to apply to any other parts of the world where people can't seem to get their heads together. And before ya know it, we'll finally have that one-world government I've been hoping for.

But hey. Humanity is too petty to think that way.

And the difference between the IRA and these Islamic organisations is a case of scale. Whereas one has reasonable demands that can be negotiated with; The other is comprised of absolutists. The IRA's aim, I don't believe, was the annhilation of Great Britain - therefore an agreement could be reached. But how can one negotiate with someone who wants you dissolved?

I guess you haven't read Haniyeh's op-ed then, where he talks about 1948 issues and the need to address them using internationally accepted norms. Were you also aware that Hamas were discussing the idea of recognising the states of Israel and Palestine along 1967 lines? Fatah and Hamas prisoners came up with the idea, President Abbas threatened to call a referendum on it if Hamas did not support it, and Hamas eventually gave in (Haniyeh was supposedly part of the group that favoured it from the start). So get this clear: Hamas gave up the idea of dissolving Israel. If you've read the op-ed, you'll see that even now he talks of Israel and Palestine having equal rights as states. That's more of a concession than the IRA ever formally gave us before their disbandment last year.



Also, it's still terrible, but an attack every few days at the height of the troubles... compared to multiple daily attacks at the height of the intifadahs... Not quite the same now is it? As for the tube. Well, I'll admit, I try to avoid it myself. People stink. But you'll forgive me for being a little callous about a mere 52 deaths - when compared to this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_committed_during_the_Al-Aqsa_Intifada). Make no mistake, I judge 7/7 to be a terrible incident, but for that one incident (ignoring the damp squib a couple of weeks later) to be on an equal footing with what happens elsewhere? That's just a little to self-concerned.
As opposed to your good self in the north where Muslim-committed massacres are two-a-penny.

If you want to talk about body counts, note that the number of Palestinians killed by the IDF amount to at least 5 times the number of Israelis killed by Hamas and other terrorist groups. That's ignoring deaths due to deprivation caused by destruction of civil infrastructure. In the latest incidents, 16 Israelis have been killed so far (note the precise number), while 200-odd Palestinians have been killed (note the rough number, blurred by the scale). Typically if Israeli death totals are counted in 2 figures, Palestinian death totals in the same period are counted in 3 figures.

[Somebody Else]

Question is... why are you focussing so much on Hamas? I thought we were talking about Hezbollah... After all, the subject of this thread is the bombing of Lebanon.


As opposed to your good self in the north where Muslim-committed massacres are two-a-penny.

If experiencing the actual events we're talking about were a requirement for comment on this board, there would be very little said, nay? After all, I'm sure if there were explosives going off willy nilly around me, the last thing I'd be doing is typing away here. As I said, lets try and be objective here - no need to be personal, hmm? (Also, the local neds around here are more than enough to put the wind up anyone...)

Comparing apples and oranges - so, are we to compare the IRA to the IDF then? I was comparing the IRA to Hamas et al. Why not mention the Black and Tans etc.? Or do they not quite present quite the right image? Also, whereas the UK was in a position to dominate Ireland as a whole, Israel may be able to do so to Palestine, but that's not all it's up against - and as this is the case, there is the continued belief that Israel can be brought to heel by force.

So. Can we get back to the issue at hand?

[Husar]

The issue at hand is Israel bombing southern Lebanon, making the people there hate Israel even more. Meanwhile, Hezbollah are firing Katjuschas into Haifa and it´s sourroundings, making the Israelis want their heads even more.

So in the end we have two selfish factions dragging some civilians into their war and I´d say both are pretty wrong.

What I found interesting though, warching the news on TV last night, was that factory owners in southern Lebanon are often required to pay Hezbollah which is why Israel also bombs their factories.

Also Israel refuses to stop attacks so that embassies can fly foreigners out, which sounds like they really don´t care about the lives of innocents who have nothing to do with the matter. Someone needs to slap those jewish extremists for their attitude.

[Tribesman]

are we to compare the IRA to the IDF then?
Well the IDF grew out of the IRA , but you are talking about the other IDF aren't you . well the IDF also grew out of a terrorist organisation , so the IDF is like the IDF .:juggle2:
The IRA blew up a lighthouse , the IDF blew up a lighthouse .:idea2: no not that IDF the other one .:laugh4:
You mention the Tans (btw they were the last to raze a town) , they were government forces just like the IDF , government forces can commit terrorism (as yesterdays submission to the UN about some earlier bombings in Lebanon seem to show , though of course maybe the confessions are the result of torture that isn't really torture) .

Also, whereas the UK was in a position to dominate Ireland as a whole, Israel may be able to do so to Palestine
Though eventually the cost becomes too great for too little return so they withdraw .
Now it could be done , if you either exterminate the local population , or treat them so well that the vast(almost total) majority are really happy to be under your rule .
But in the case of Israel it has shown that it is woefully inadequate when it comes to treating people equally (even its own citizens of the Jewish faith who are the wrong sort of Jews , let alone its bedouin /christian /muslim population) . If you don't treat people equally then they are not going to be relly happy , they are going to be angry and an angry population tends to lead to a litlebit of a problem .

So. Can we get back to the issue at hand?
You summed it up earlier didnt you ?
Gods I despise the human race.
Humans eh , silly creatures .:shrug:

[Pannonian]

Question is... why are you focussing so much on Hamas? I thought we were talking about Hezbollah... After all, the subject of this thread is the bombing of Lebanon.

Hamas currently represents Palestine as their freely elected government. As I've explained before, Israel is a convenient excuse for any Muslim (not Islamic, their aims have little to do with religion) terrorist groups. The west talks about Israel's right to self-defence, they point to Palestine and hey presto, instant support for violent action. The west tries to marginalise the terrorists, they point to Palestine and hey presto, instant support for their continued relevance. The west creates a democratic state in Iraq, they point to Palestine and hey presto, instant support for anti-Israeli rhetoric.

Converse to neocon claims, all solutions to middle eastern problems run through Israel-Palestine, not vice versa. For a lasting solution to any of the other problems, you have to take away their most ready excuse and justification, the injustice of Palestine. You can see this even in far away Iraq, where any politician wishing to gain or retain power has to be strongly anti-Israel. How much more so for neighbouring Lebanon.



If experiencing the actual events we're talking about were a requirement for comment on this board, there would be very little said, nay? After all, I'm sure if there were explosives going off willy nilly around me, the last thing I'd be doing is typing away here. As I said, lets try and be objective here - no need to be personal, hmm? (Also, the local neds around here are more than enough to put the wind up anyone...)

You asked me if I knew what it's like to live in a city where people flinch when a car backfires, so I told you I live in a city where people are at least apprehensive whenever they get on a train. You told me I was self-absorbed and the 52 Londoners dead did not compare with the hundreds of Israeli dead in the intifadas, so I told you the Palestinian death toll which was far worse.

If you think this is getting personal, don't go there in the first place.



Comparing apples and oranges - so, are we to compare the IRA to the IDF then? I was comparing the IRA to Hamas et al. Why not mention the Black and Tans etc.? Or do they not quite present quite the right image? Also, whereas the UK was in a position to dominate Ireland as a whole, Israel may be able to do so to Palestine, but that's not all it's up against - and as this is the case, there is the continued belief that Israel can be brought to heel by force.

So. Can we get back to the issue at hand?
Don't polarise the various sides and expect us to swallow it. And if you want to assign historical roles to the various sides, feel free. Just don't expect us to swallow that either. The IDF are the IDF. Hamas are Hamas. Hezbollah are Hezbollah. Where comparisons can be made, they can only be made in terms of generalisations, not specific point-by-point analogies. If you find it difficult to find the right metaphor to describe your point, make it in plain language instead.

[Pannonian]

You summed it up earlier didnt you ?
Gods I despise the human race.
Humans eh , silly creatures .:shrug:
Memorable quotes by Tony Banks, former London MP.

http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=24837&SESSION=682
Early Day Motion 1255, 21st May 2004

That this House is appalled, but barely surprised, at the revelations in M15 files regarding the bizarre and inhumane proposals to use pigeons as flying bombs; recognises the important and live-saving role of carrier pigeons in two world wars and wonders at the lack of gratitude towards these gentle creatures; and believes that humans represent the most obscene, perverted, cruel, uncivilised and lethal species ever to inhabit the planet and looks forward to the day when the inevitable asteroid slams into the earth and wipes them out thus giving nature the opportunity to start again.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1975281,00.html
Asked to comment on football hooliganism abroad after allegations of police brutality, he once said: “Personally I wish the police had truncheoned the English fans to death, but I can’t really say that on the record.”

I miss Banksy, the archetypal Londoner.

[Somebody Else]

Ok ok. I give up. Lets abolish Israel. Lets leave the various Muslim sects another chunk of territory to fight over.

I'm bored of this now. I've got some babies to eat.

[x-dANGEr]

Yep - emotional appeal.You can use your blanket "emotional appeal" anytime, but it sure is incorrect.

Exactly the way it is defined in Websters.
Then you're wrong!! They might have the same rocket designs, I don't care (And don't know), but they surely did assemble them..

So showing you that there was trades, no trades, and concession releases seem to fall out the window because you wish to maintain the illusion and baised that states there is never a release of prisoners without a trade.
Did I say I do? (I might have known "false" info about this aspect, but still, one captives release in 60 years is no where near efficient to show a good sign).

Does someone have a problem reviewing information outside of their own paridiagms(SP)?

I don't think so.

Emotional appeal is its own refutation.

Read the word slowly: "I don't agree".

France supplied the Technology and even some of the scientists and material in developing Israel's nuclear generators. Israel developed their own nuclear weapons from this start. Most likely with the knowledge that one has been developed before enabled them to speed up their own ability to make nuclear weapons. The United States failed to make any waves about Israel's possible development of nuclear weapons when the US first learned of the violations by Israel back in the 1960s and into the 1970's. This is all contained in the FAS document and yes even the quote alreadly provided in this thread.

Thanks for prooving my point, and supporting it. ~;)

[Redleg]

You can use your blanket "emotional appeal" anytime, but it sure is incorrect.
Are you stating that most of what you have written is not emotional appeal. Emotional appeal is its own refuation



Then you're wrong!! They might have the same rocket designs, I don't care (And don't know), but they surely did assemble them..


Same design normally indicates something, like a transfer of technology and knowledge.

Assemble is not the only meaning of manufacture either, assembly is a step in then manufacturing process. The making of the compentents is also a part in the manafacturing process. You are doing one of two things confusing the Manufacturing process with the definition of Manufacture, or worse yet you are attempting to use a different meaning of manafacture then the rest of the world. Here It seems you might need some help from Websters with the definition.



manufacture
2 entries found for manufacture.
To select an entry, click on it.
manufacture[1,noun]manufacture[2,verb]

Main Entry: 1man·u·fac·ture
Pronunciation: "man-y&-'fak-ch&r, "ma-n&-
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle French, from Medieval Latin manufactura, from Latin manu factus, literally, made by hand
1 : something made from raw materials by hand or by machinery
2 a : the process of making wares by hand or by machinery especially when carried on systematically with division of labor b : a productive industry using mechanical power and machinery
3 : the act or process of producing something


and the verb form of the word


Main Entry: 2manufacture
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): -tured; man·u·fac·tur·ing /-'fak-ch&-ri[ng], -'fak-shri[ng]/
transitive verb
1 : to make into a product suitable for use
2 a : to make from raw materials by hand or by machinery b : to produce according to an organized plan and with division of labor c : PREFABRICATE <a manufactured home>
3 : INVENT, FABRICATE <known to manufacture evidence>
4 : to produce as if by manufacturing : CREATE <writers who manufacture stories for television>
intransitive verb : to engage in manufacture
- man&#183;u&#183;fac&#183;tur&#183;abil&#183;i&#183;ty /-"fak-ch&-r&-'bi-l&-tE, -"fak-shr&-'bi-/ noun
- man&#183;u&#183;fac&#183;tur&#183;able /-'fak-ch&-r&-b&l, -'fak-shr&-b&l/ adjective
- manufacturing noun


If Hezabollah has a faclitity that can manufacture rocket engines for the type of missiles going to Haifa, in Lebanon then the arguements being used by Israel for going into Lebanon begin to make more sense.

Is your assertion here is that Hezabollah has the material and facialities to machine a more complex missile system then the previous system? Now remember that the rocket that hit the ship is now being thought to be a guided missile. This type of missile requires even more precise machining and has a more complex assemply process. Which is the more likely explaination for these two weapon systems. That Iran is manufacturing the components and shipping them to Hezabollah for assembly. Or Hezabollah is manufacturing the weapons on their own from Iranian designs?

One answer almost gives a justification to Israel for invading and destroying parts of Lebanon because of Hezabollah's attack.

The other explanation is that Hezabollah is in over its head and Iran decided to give them some means to strike back at Israel.

Now I lean toward the second statement. Since I lean toward the arguement that Hezabollah decided that it wanted to gain some of its repatuation (SP) back since a group in Palenstine decided to kidnap an Israeli soldier.




Did I say I do? (I might have known "false" info about this aspect, but still, one captives release in 60 years is no where near efficient to show a good sign).

Here is where your emotional appeal arguement was most telling. You stated that they have never conducted a release without a trade. Evidence indicates that this is wrong. This retort is only a quibble, your initial premise was indeed incorrect.



I don't think so.


Your comments in this thread refutes this statement.



Read the word slowly: "I don't agree".


Reading slowly - reading fast does not change the fact that emotional appeal is its own refuation.



Thanks for prooving my point, and supporting it. ~;)
[/quote]

Your orginial premise was that it was the UK - this was incorrect.

If you believe this proves your point was proven by my statement - your again mistaken, you clearly indicated that you found nothing. So your points have consistently been shown to be false concerning this particlur area. Was this because you did not actually read the information, or more was it because you could not see the information because it countered your own baised view.

Arab countries protesting against Israeli development of nuclear weapons 3 to 4 years ago, happens to fall in line with to little way to late. They should of been protesting about it in the 1950 and 1960s, however most were still focusing on the destruction of Israel versus what Israel was doing.

Now to having proven that the United States chose to ignore Israel development of Nuclear Weapons - something that I have stated before your attempt here or the previous post. So basically x-danger you failed to read the comments from FAS, nor does it seem you paid attention to what I stated, since both FAS and myself have clearly stated that postion. However once again thanks to demonstrating that emotional appeal arguements are their own refutation.

[x-dANGEr]

Are you stating that most of what you have written is not emotional appeal. Emotional appeal is its own refuationYes I am.

Assemble is not the only meaning of manufacture either, assembly is a step in then manufacturing process. The making of the compentents is also a part in the manafacturing process. You are doing one of two things confusing the Manufacturing process with the definition of Manufacture, or worse yet you are attempting to use a different meaning of manafacture then the rest of the world. Here It seems you might need some help from Websters with the definition.

I know what manufacturing means, and I meant what I said in it's full meaning. It seems you have troubles getting it.. You're even writing it wrong..

If Hezabollah has a faclitity that can manufacture rocket engines for the type of missiles going to Haifa, in Lebanon then the arguements being used by Israel for going into Lebanon begin to make more sense. You don't justify something after you do it.. Like, Jordan attacks Israel (Let's say in the 70s), and is able to conquer it. It finds that it has Nuclear materials, so it justifies it's attack with that.. That's wrong!

Here is where your emotional appeal arguement was most telling. You stated that they have never conducted a release without a trade. Evidence indicates that this is wrong. This retort is only a quibble, your initial premise was indeed incorrect.

I already stood corrected.. Move on and stop the repetitivity.

Your comments in this thread refutes this statement. In your opinion.

Reading slowly - reading fast does not change the fact that emotional appeal is its own refuation.
It maybe, but that is irrelevant.

If you believe this proves your point was proven by my statement - your again mistaken, you clearly indicated that you found nothing. So your points have consistently been shown to be false concerning this particlur area. Was this because you did not actually read the information, or more was it because you could not see the information because it countered your own baised view.

Arab countries protesting against Israeli development of nuclear weapons 3 to 4 years ago, happens to fall in line with to little way to late. They should of been protesting about it in the 1950 and 1960s, however most were still focusing on the destruction of Israel versus what Israel was doing.

Now to having proven that the United States chose to ignore Israel development of Nuclear Weapons - something that I have stated before your attempt here or the previous post. So basically x-danger you failed to read the comments from FAS, nor does it seem you paid attention to what I stated, since both FAS and myself have clearly stated that postion. However once again thanks to demonstrating that emotional appeal arguements are their own refutation.
My point that Israel got help from a European country.. Got it? I wasn't sure if it was France or the UK, but you proved it was France, and that still doesn't oppose my sentence saying "from europe", but it surely does oppose mine saying from the UK, which is why I stand corrected on that one.

Now let's clear some points:

1) Do you support Israel's attack on Lebanon? Knowing that the attack hasn't killed less than 10 Hezbullah men, and all others are civilians?

2) Do you justify Israel's attack on Lebanon? By the terms that Hezbullah had captured 2 soldiers, don' you justify his attack on Israel, knowing that Israel holds hundreds more than that?

3) Do you neglect the fact that Israel has the ability to target only military targets, but still fire rockets on two cars evacuating from a town they ordered to be evacuated, knowing that those cars were filled with women and children?

[Lucjan]

I haven't taken the time to read the entirety of this thread, and doubt I will, I only came to leave my opinion on the issue.

Regardless of what camp you sit in, I can offer only my opinion as, what I perceive to be, a clear thinking, logical individual.

This is an ongoing situation that has existed since the end of the second world war, everybody knows this is nothing new.
Israel is acting in what it believes to be its best interest as a nation. The Islamic community around it is acting in what it believes to be its best interest as a people. But here's where the problem is.

The Israeli people have commodities and a lifestyle that significantly surpasses their islamic neighbors. Islamic countries are, almost by entirety, third world, underdeveloped, dirt poor nations whose only illusion from the squalor of daily life is their religion. Turkey and Kuwait seem to be exempt from this situation due to significant westernization of their people. So..

What happens when you place the unquestioning faith of desperate, miserable people in the hands of religious figures who control all the wealth and political clout of their region because their people hand everything they own to their religion in hopes of achieving something better in life?

You get religious figures who take advantage of their followers faith in their religion to distract them from the misery of daily life by pointing their disgust and indignation towards the most obvious enemy, the people who are not your own, who occupy a place your religion says is yours.

This is what happens...it's that simple.

I'm not pledging my support to either side, so long as this conflict is kept amongst themselves.

I see only two possible solutions to the problem.
1 - The current leaders of their religion and political strength must be systematically and immediately removed, only those who would prove to be logical, peaceful, optimistic and generous individuals should be allowed to run a house of worship. Any man who claims to be a man of God but would urge war and death on another people, is, by all major religious faiths, not a man of god, but rather a man of evil. Islam may be the head of the middle-eastern world, but the imams are the neck, and they can turn the head any way they please. It is unforetunate that they turn it to hate and bloodshed. That..and the simple fact that a couple of radical, clearly absurd practices must be put to an end by these religious leaders (like the practice of gashing ones head open or flogging oneself with chains on the day of Ashura).
2 - This war must be fought, one camp or the other must be eradicated entirely.

I see no other possible ends to a situation that has already exhausted all other options.

[Pannonian]

I haven't taken the time to read the entirety of this thread, and doubt I will, I only came to leave my opinion on the issue.

Regardless of what camp you sit in, I can offer only my opinion as, what I perceive to be, a clear thinking, logical individual.

That set-up alarms me. Like Foxnews' "Fair and balanced", and BNP introductions of "I'm not a racist but..", these disclaimers tend to precede main bodies that are the opposite of what they claim to be. Still, let's see how this one goes.



This is an ongoing situation that has existed since the end of the second world war, everybody knows this is nothing new.
Israel is acting in what it believes to be its best interest as a nation. The Islamic community around it is acting in what it believes to be its best interest as a people. But here's where the problem is.

The Israeli people have commodities and a lifestyle that significantly surpasses their islamic neighbors. Islamic countries are, almost by entirety, third world, underdeveloped, dirt poor nations whose only illusion from the squalor of daily life is their religion. Turkey and Kuwait seem to be exempt from this situation due to significant westernization of their people. So..

What happens when you place the unquestioning faith of desperate, miserable people in the hands of religious figures who control all the wealth and political clout of their region because their people hand everything they own to their religion in hopes of achieving something better in life?

You get religious figures who take advantage of their followers faith in their religion to distract them from the misery of daily life by pointing their disgust and indignation towards the most obvious enemy, the people who are not your own, who occupy a place your religion says is yours.

This is what happens...it's that simple.

I'm not pledging my support to either side, so long as this conflict is kept amongst themselves.

I see only two possible solutions to the problem.
1 - The current leaders of their religion and political strength must be systematically and immediately removed, only those who would prove to be logical, peaceful, optimistic and generous individuals should be allowed to run a house of worship. Any man who claims to be a man of God but would urge war and death on another people, is, by all major religious faiths, not a man of god, but rather a man of evil. Islam may be the head of the middle-eastern world, but the imams are the neck, and they can turn the head any way they please. It is unforetunate that they turn it to hate and bloodshed. That..and the simple fact that a couple of radical, clearly absurd practices must be put to an end by these religious leaders (like the practice of gashing ones head open or flogging oneself with chains on the day of Ashura).
2 - This war must be fought, one camp or the other must be eradicated entirely.

I see no other possible ends to a situation that has already exhausted all other options.
So Israel is entirely innocent of all guilt whatever it has done or will ever do in the future, Muslims are subhumans who don't deserve to interact with us, their leaders should be taken out, and there should be a total and exterminatory war to settle the differences between the civilisations once and for all. Fair enough. To think that I feared you were another racist bigot from your intro, I'm glad I was mistaken. Your analysis was indeed that of a clear thinking, logical individual.

[Lucjan]

Well if thats how you feel, then please explain to an uninformed person how the Islamic community can so full heartedly support people who don't have their best interests in mind?

[Reenk Roink]

Well if thats how you feel, then please explain to an uninformed person how the Islamic community can so full heartedly support people who don't have their best interests in mind?

Enemy of my enemy...

[Lucjan]

In short, all I pretty much said was that I feel in order to secure peace in the middle east those with power and influence need to be replaced with more peaceful, diplomatic individuals.

Pannonian took this thirty steps further and turned me into a racist, but he's entitled to his opinion.

It's just beyond my understanding how reasonable people can follow ideas that will clearly do nothing but bring them more suffering. It's like some inborn masochistic ideal.

[Redleg]

Yes I am.

Yes indeed emotional appeal is its own refutation....



I know what manufacturing means, and I meant what I said in it's full meaning. It seems you have troubles getting it.. You're even writing it wrong..

Ah it seems that individual getting it wrong is yourself - again emotional appeal is its own refutation. What part of the manufacturing process would you liked explained to you.... It seems once again when the definition does not agree with your statements you begin to quibble, I find it rather amusing.



You don't justify something after you do it.. Like, Jordan attacks Israel (Let's say in the 70s), and is able to conquer it. It finds that it has Nuclear materials, so it justifies it's attack with that.. That's wrong!

So in essence you must agree Hezabollah is wrong in its attack of Israeli soldiers in Israel and its kidnapping of two soldiers? You don't justify something after you do it....



I already stood corrected.. Move on and stop the repetitivity.

You don't want it repeated don't quibble.




In your opinion.


Again your comments in this thread refute the statement that this was referenced to....



It maybe, but that is irrelevant.

SO you do agree that using emotional appeal is its own refutation, and that would make most of your arguement irrelevant.



My point that Israel got help from a European country.. Got it?

your are quibbling over your own failure, I find that rather amusing.



I wasn't sure if it was France or the UK, but you proved it was France, and that still doesn't oppose my sentence saying "from europe", but it surely does oppose mine saying from the UK, which is why I stand corrected on that one.


So once again your orginal premise on blaming it on the UK was demonstrated to be false. Again it proves emotional appeal is its own refutation.



Now let's clear some points:


Oh I have been really clear on this issue if you have been paying attention.



1) Do you support Israel's attack on Lebanon? Knowing that the attack hasn't killed less than 10 Hezbullah men, and all others are civilians?


The answer is clearly indicated in this thread and at least one other. My discussion is directed at Hezbollah and my disgust with their actions, which happens to coincide with my disgust with Israeli actions. Hezbollah in this action is just as wrong as Israel, the innocent in this is the Lebanese citizens who are caught in the crossfire between the two.



2) Do you justify Israel's attack on Lebanon? By the terms that Hezbullah had captured 2 soldiers, don' you justify his attack on Israel, knowing that Israel holds hundreds more than that?

So are your defending Hezbollah's act of aggression to iniate an act of war against the state of Israel? Care x-danger your walking a very fine line in attempting to get someone to state an opinion that is not their's.

I don't justify Israel's action - nor will I accept a justification for Hezbollah's actions. Hezbollah decided to start a fight, Israel decided to play along. Both are equally wrong in the escalation of the conflict.



3) Do you neglect the fact that Israel has the ability to target only military targets, but still fire rockets on two cars evacuating from a town they ordered to be evacuated, knowing that those cars were filled with women and children?

Do you neglect the fact that Hezbollah has been firing rockets on civilian targets for many months now? Do you deny the fact that a missile strike on civilian targets was done concurrent with the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers as a diversion?

Do I neglect the fact that Israel has killed civilians? I haven't seen myself write any such statements.

Your attempts at emotional appeal are once again transparent. And you are your own arguements refutation with such attempts.

[Papewaio]

Enemy of my enemy...

Should always be carefully checked out. After all it might be a good idea at that point to make friends with your enemy and both gang up on your enemies enemy instead of just allying with them.

[x-dANGEr]

Yes indeed emotional appeal is its own refutation....
Yes I am "stating that most of what you have written is not emotional appeal". (Just to quote what I agreede upon).


Ah it seems that individual getting it wrong is yourself - again emotional appeal is its own refutation. What part of the manufacturing process would you liked explained to you.... It seems once again when the definition does not agree with your statements you begin to quibble, I find it rather amusing.

The definition you posted does agree to me. May you be so humble and give us the parts that contrary me?

So in essence you must agree Hezabollah is wrong in its attack of Israeli soldiers in Israel and its kidnapping of two soldiers? You don't justify something after you do it....

I think that attack was already justified. Israel has captives and won't let them go. Point.

SO you do agree that using emotional appeal is its own refutation, and that would make most of your arguement irrelevant.

But I don't agree that most of my argument is.

your are quibbling over your own failure, I find that rather amusing.
Says you, the most quibbling argumentive person I've ever met?

So once again your orginal premise on blaming it on the UK was demonstrated to be false. Again it proves emotional appeal is its own refutation.

How does it do so.. (Boring really.. You just say the magical word: "Emotional appeal as it's own refutation". I even doubt you know it's meaning now..)

Can you give some YES or NO answers, please?

The answer is clearly indicated in this thread and at least one other. My discussion is directed at Hezbollah and my disgust with their actions, which happens to coincide with my disgust with Israeli actions. Hezbollah in this action is just as wrong as Israel, the innocent in this is the Lebanese citizens who are caught in the crossfire between the two.

What do you feel about Israel keeping captives then? Also disgust?

I don't justify Israel's action - nor will I accept a justification for Hezbollah's actions. Hezbollah decided to start a fight, Israel decided to play along. Both are equally wrong in the escalation of the conflict.

I don't justify Israel's action - nor will I accept a justification for Hezbullah's actions. Hezbullah decided to free some captives, Israel decided to retaltiate and kill as many civilians as they could, destroying all the infsastructure they can. Both are wrong equally in the escalation of the conflict.

I can see Hezbullah did fire hordes of rockets onto Israeli colonies, but only after Israel decided not to negotiate.. The "diversion attack" you pretend to have been (Which I really have seen no channel around here mention a THING about it), if has happened it hasn't killed anyone anyway. (By your sayings). So, how are they both at same fault?!

Do you neglect the fact that Hezbollah has been firing rockets on civilian targets for many months now? Yes, I neglect it because I'm unaware of it. AFAIK, Hezbullah hasn't been firing missiles on civilian areas for months. Maybe you should revise your sources..

Do you deny the fact that a missile strike on civilian targets was done concurrent with the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers as a diversion?

Well, every news channel hasn't mentioned a thing about it. So, I dont believe it, but still don't deny it.

[Banquo's Ghost]

I see only two possible solutions to the problem.
1 - The current leaders of their religion and political strength must be systematically and immediately removed, only those who would prove to be logical, peaceful, optimistic and generous individuals should be allowed to run a house of worship. Any man who claims to be a man of God but would urge war and death on another people, is, by all major religious faiths, not a man of god, but rather a man of evil. Islam may be the head of the middle-eastern world, but the imams are the neck, and they can turn the head any way they please. It is unforetunate that they turn it to hate and bloodshed. That..and the simple fact that a couple of radical, clearly absurd practices must be put to an end by these religious leaders (like the practice of gashing ones head open or flogging oneself with chains on the day of Ashura).

Does your clear-thinking and logic extend beyond bigotry on one side? Put another way, what if you replace the Isalmic references with Orthodox Jewish ones in the above solution? Since the Israeli government is largely held to ransom by these guys who religiously believe Israel should stretch to the Euphrates, perhaps they are causing some dissension in the region too? By the way, did you know that many devoted Catholics practice mortification of the flesh, including self-flagellation? Are they up next? :inquisitive:


2 - This war must be fought, one camp or the other must be eradicated entirely.


Of course, because genocide has always been a popular and effective method of bringing peace. :rolleyes:

[kataphraktoi]

Perhaps, Israel and the international community should have covertly assisted the Lebanese government to root out Hezbollah.

Hezbollah has its own mini-Lebanon through its infratructure funded by Iran wth healthcare and welfare services, why wouldn't a poor Shi'ite not support Hezbollah under such circumstances. If Lebanon was able to create some sort of infrastructure like that, Shi'ites would not have to depend on the Hezbollah.

Man, i feel so sorry for Lebanon, it use to be such a nice place :embarassed:

Paris of the East, fare thee well....

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Does your clear-thinking and logic extend beyond bigotry on one side? Put another way, what if you replace the Isalmic references with Orthodox Jewish ones in the above solution? Since the Israeli government is largely held to ransom by these guys who religiously believe Israel should stretch to the Euphrates, perhaps they are causing some dissension in the region too? By the way, did you know that many devoted Catholics practice mortification of the flesh, including self-flagellation? Are they up next? :inquisitive:

Nice turn. While (to be fair) I don't think the chap's original point was intended as a racist assessment so much as a condemnation of radicalism coupled with an attempt to paint this conflict as a "Haves" v "Have nots" struggle; examining an argument by reversing the actors in their roles can be useful in determining, however, if the argument is implicitly racist or otherwise biased.


Of course, because genocide has always been a popular and effective method of bringing peace. :rolleyes:

Sadly, genocide -- at least in the loose sense of that term -- has been a popular and all too frequently effective historical choice. Witness Rome's treatment of Carthage or Numantia, the exploitation of the Caribee amerinds, the shunting aside of the native populations of Canada, Mexico, and the United States, Stalin's forced collectivization of the Russian and Ukrainian peasantry, the Irish starvation of 1847.....your "rolleyes" smilie would be more accurately replaced by one shedding tears.

[Lucjan]

The ignorance in the backroom is astounding, if anything it would be nice if people learned how to truly read and interpret before they jumped to unfounded, incorrect and irrational conclusions about others.

I am well aware of specific practices among Opus Dei, but it's clear that having a conversation free from unnecessary emotional outbursts isn't a possibility in the backroom. I have more productive things to do..

[Lucjan]

Nice turn. While (to be fair) I don't think the chap's original point was intended as a racist assessment so much as a condemnation of radicalism coupled with an attempt to paint this conflict as a "Haves" v "Have nots" struggle; examining an argument by reversing the actors in their roles can be useful in determining, however, if the argument is implicitly racist or otherwise biased.



Sadly, genocide -- at least in the loose sense of that term -- has been a popular and all too frequently effective historical choice. Witness Rome's treatment of Carthage or Numantia, the exploitation of the Caribee amerinds, the shunting aside of the native populations of Canada, Mexico, and the United States, Stalin's forced collectivization of the Russian and Ukrainian peasantry, the Irish starvation of 1847.....your "rolleyes" smilie would be more accurately replaced by one shedding tears.


Thank you Seamus, that was the kind of intelligent, well thought interpretation of the post I had been expecting. Instead I got flamed.

It is a condemnation of radicalism, I don't agree with the practices of Ashura, I don't agree with Opus Dei's practices of self-flaggelation and the bindings, I don't agree with anybody who feels that through the murder and injury of others will they ever ascend to a higher plane of holy existance.

And I feel, also, that while the influence of orthodox rabbi's among Israel's government is also detrimental to the entire situation, I don't feel that it's as blatantly destructive, it's more like a hurdle or a minor hindrance. I don't see rabbis pledging in the streets that all jews should cross the border and bomb palestinians, that does not happen. They may have an unforetunate role in the situation, but they're not professing a radical, violent outburst that does nothing more than fuel the fire of an already intense blaze. Israel's new Prime Minister may be taking some hardline tactics towards the situation, but the radical islamists have been hardlining Israel for decades, and it may appear to him that this is now the only way to really strike back. Diplomacy has failed countless times, Israel is working on pulling out of Gaza and West Bank and STILL Hamas and Hezbollah launched an attack, how is that supposed to be interpreted? The arab world...has declared the peace process 'dead'.

I am no racist, though you may feel so or paint me so, I'm simply saying what I see.

[Banquo's Ghost]

The ignorance in the backroom is astounding, if anything it would be nice if people learned how to truly read and interpret before they jumped to unfounded, incorrect and irrational conclusions about others.

Well, then it wouldn't be the Backroom then, would it? :laugh4:

Seriously, I am sad you thought my reply ignorant. I was trying to challenge your argument by placing it in a different context. I was not implying you were bigoted, but that one might do well to consider the effect of religious bigots on both sides of the disaster.


I am well aware of specific practices among Opus Dei, but it's clear that having a conversation free from unnecessary emotional outbursts isn't a possibility in the backroom. I have more productive things to do..

It's not just Opus Dei, but many normal people, both lay and religious - Muslims fast at Ramadan, Catholics at Lent, for example. The point I was making is that mortification of the flesh and symbolic self-punishment are integral to many religions - why does the practice amongst Muslims single them out as dangerous fanatics?


Sadly, genocide -- at least in the loose sense of that term -- has been a popular and all too frequently effective historical choice. Witness Rome's treatment of Carthage or Numantia, the exploitation of the Caribee amerinds, the shunting aside of the native populations of Canada, Mexico, and the United States, Stalin's forced collectivization of the Russian and Ukrainian peasantry, the Irish starvation of 1847.....your "rolleyes" smilie would be more accurately replaced by one shedding tears.

You are, of course, absolutely right Seamus. The rolling eyes smiley did not get across the real emotion I wished to express, which was a sense of despair that a well-educated person of the 21st century would still advocate this as a solution. However, like you, I have toyed with the notion of a 'plague on both your houses' as the only way out of the circle of violence - for which I am not proud, but I understand Lucjan's frustrations.

The problem for this argument of course, is where do they stop? For each side: Eradicate every last Israeli, or every last Jew? Eradicate every last Palestinian, or Lebanese, or Arab, or Muslim? What level of killing will stop the sons and daughters of the dead continuing the battle?

[Redleg]

Yes I am "stating that most of what you have written is not emotional appeal". (Just to quote what I agreede upon).

Then once again you are using a false premise...



The definition you posted does agree to me. May you be so humble and give us the parts that contrary me?

If you believe assemble is the main definition of manufacture you have a problem understanding the definition. Try again.




I think that attack was already justified. Israel has captives and won't let them go. Point.

Hmm not a valid point in the way you think it is. The attack by Hezbollah on Israel justifies Israel's actions using the logic that you are using in claiming Hezbollah's attack is justified. So in essence you also agree that Israel is justified in attacking back.



But I don't agree that most of my argument is.


Then your comment was irrevelant.



Says you, the most quibbling argumentive person I've ever met?


Incorrect - pointing out the quibbling nature of your arguement is not quibbling. Pointing out the errors in your emotional appeal positions is not quibbling. Now argumentive might be a proper description, however most of what you have attempted in your position deserve a counter. How many times now have your positions been shown to be incorrect?



How does it do so.. (Boring really.. You just say the magical word: "Emotional appeal as it's own refutation". I even doubt you know it's meaning now..)


Go back and figure out how many times your emotional appeal arguements have been shown to be incorrect - that will give you a hint.



Can you give some YES or NO answers, please?


Why should I?



What do you feel about Israel keeping captives then? Also disgust?


If the captives are caught performing criminal acts then they should be in prison. If they are being held as a form of hostages then Israel is wrong.




I don't justify Israel's action - nor will I accept a justification for Hezbullah's actions. Hezbullah decided to free some captives, Israel decided to retaltiate and kill as many civilians as they could, destroying all the infsastructure they can. Both are wrong equally in the escalation of the conflict.

Nice try but you failed terribily. Your commnt here shows that you are attempting to justify Hezbollah's actions. The comment in blue that is. Hezbollah did not decide to attempt to free some captives - Hezbollah decided to attack Israeli soldiers and civilians to kill and capture some soldiers to attempt to negotate an exchange. Hezbollah's actions are just as disgusting as Israels. The degree of damage is more for Israel but the nature of both is the same.



I can see Hezbullah did fire hordes of rockets onto Israeli colonies, but only after Israel decided not to negotiate.. The "diversion attack" you pretend to have been (Which I really have seen no channel around here mention a THING about it), if has happened it hasn't killed anyone anyway. (By your sayings). So, how are they both at same fault?!

The diversion attack was covered in both Arab and western news sources, so no pretending by myself, but we can see where your emotional appeal is once again its own refutation.

Both are at fault because both decided to use violence. Not a hard concept to understand now is it?




Yes, I neglect it because I'm unaware of it. AFAIK, Hezbullah hasn't been firing missiles on civilian areas for months. Maybe you should revise your sources..

Maybe you should review yours, there are not as many as I alluded to with the emotion appeal - but there have been a few scattered occurances. To claim Hezbollah is not hitting civilians is false, to claim Hezbollah has not targeted purely civilian targets is again false. Has Hezbollah primarily attempted to hit military targets is what one should ask themselves. The answer one finds will often surprise both sides. A hint: It is not as much as Israel claims, nor is it as little as Hezbollah states either.

Several from 2005 and into 2006.

http://www.postchronicle.com/news/security/printer_2122580.shtml

http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=2&x_outlet=2&x_article=899

An interesting blog - but one must take any blog with a grain of salt. However at least this one lists most of its sources. Scroll to the bottom of the page - it mentions several rocket attacks by Hezbollah before the July violence

http://vitalperspective.typepad.com/vital_perspective_clarity/hezbollah/index.html


Now there is some question about the civilian targeting by Hezbollah - since Israel is guilty of placing military outposts within civilian communities. With the accuracy of the Hezbollah rockets being what it is - civilians are always going to get hit - and most likely will be the primary effect regardless of Hezbollah's real intention.

Now I wonder if your are beginning to see the self refutation in the emotional appeal arguement?



Well, every news channel hasn't mentioned a thing about it. So, I dont believe it, but still don't deny it.

So unless a pro-Hezbollah site states that Hezbollah launced a diversionary attack at civilian targets it can not be true? Hmm and who used the term propaganda in another thread first?

[Tribesman]

I don't see rabbis pledging in the streets that all jews should cross the border and bomb palestinians, that does not happen.
Well you should look a little harder Lucjan as it does happen , there are some very crazy rabbis out there , perhaps they should be exterminated along with all the crazy Imams .

[x-dANGEr]

If you believe assemble is the main definition of manufacture you have a problem understanding the definition. Try again.
Aseemble is a part of it. And as long as Hezbullah did the assemble, no one else could've manufactured.

Hmm not a valid point in the way you think it is. The attack by Hezbollah on Israel justifies Israel's actions using the logic that you are using in claiming Hezbollah's attack is justified. So in essence you also agree that Israel is justified in attacking back.

It's attack is justified. BUT, not with all this damage and civilian deaths. Hezbullah's attack was justified (IMO) because he wanted to free captives, and to do that he captived some soldiers. Now for Israel to free captives, it can free some of the already captured, that is to solve the whole matter. Or, attack Lebanon, captive some "soldiers" (Hezbullah men in this way), and then call for a trade. NOT rampage through the country killing everyone no matter what he/she thinks..

Then your comment was irrevelant.

If my answer to your question is irrelevant, then maybe your question is so?

Incorrect - pointing out the quibbling nature of your arguement is not quibbling. Pointing out the errors in your emotional appeal positions is not quibbling. Now argumentive might be a proper description, however most of what you have attempted in your position deserve a counter. How many times now have your positions been shown to be incorrect?

Pointing out my so-called 'quibbles' is quibbling, avoiding questions and minapulating words is quibbling.

Go back and figure out how many times your emotional appeal arguements have been shown to be incorrect - that will give you a hint.
Let's see:

I said Israel never freed captives without a trade, and I was wrong there. That is one. The others? (If you're going to say the UK/France thingy, I think you're wrong. Because mainly, I said Europe, you asked who specifacily, and I said maybe the UK).
You on the other hand, has called Hezbullah a Palestinian group, which makes for one for you, too.

Why should I?

To clear your stance.

If the captives are caught performing criminal acts then they should be in prison. If they are being held as a form of hostages then Israel is wrong.

Wrong.. Then the wrong base is flowing out of..?


Nice try but you failed terribily. Your commnt here shows that you are attempting to justify Hezbollah's actions. The comment in blue that is. Hezbollah did not decide to attempt to free some captives - Hezbollah decided to attack Israeli soldiers and civilians to kill and capture some soldiers to attempt to negotate an exchange. Hezbollah's actions are just as disgusting as Israels. The degree of damage is more for Israel but the nature of both is the same.

Since when the death and capture of less than 10 soldiers is as disgusting as destroying a whole country?

The diversion attack was covered in both Arab and western news sources, so no pretending by myself, but we can see where your emotional appeal is once again its own refutation.

I said 100 times I hadn't heared about it on the TV.. And blame me not, am not very good at gathering news on the net 0-i

Maybe you should review yours, there are not as many as I alluded to with the emotion appeal - but there have been a few scattered occurances. To claim Hezbollah is not hitting civilians is false, to claim Hezbollah has not targeted purely civilian targets is again false. Has Hezbollah primarily attempted to hit military targets is what one should ask themselves. The answer one finds will often surprise both sides. A hint: It is not as much as Israel claims, nor is it as little as Hezbollah states either.

Your original statement implied a usual, better said, continous missile attacks.. Note though, some of those links say that no missiles have been launched after 2000, and the one that does, shows that less than 10 of those were Katyoshas..

Now there is some question about the civilian targeting by Hezbollah - since Israel is guilty of placing military outposts within civilian communities. With the accuracy of the Hezbollah rockets being what it is - civilians are always going to get hit - and most likely will be the primary effect regardless of Hezbollah's real intention.

So you suggest Hezbullah should just sit and take the hits?

So unless a pro-Hezbollah site states that Hezbollah launced a diversionary attack at civilian targets it can not be true? Hmm and who used the term propaganda in another thread first?

So you state all arabian channels are pro-Hezbullah?

[Pannonian]

I don't see rabbis pledging in the streets that all jews should cross the border and bomb palestinians, that does not happen.
Well you should look a little harder Lucjan as it does happen , there are some very crazy rabbis out there , perhaps they should be exterminated along with all the crazy Imams .
There was a Bar Kochba thread a while ago celebrating onesuch which got locked very quickly indeed.

[drone]

There was a Bar Kochba thread a while ago celebrating onesuch which got locked very quickly indeed.
IIRC, there were several problems with that thread that had nothing to do with the politics of the rabbi in question. For one, the thread was started in the Frontroom, and the kings of Peace and Love were not amused. After several comments along the lines of "may he burn in hell", it was closed.

Every religion has it's wacko fringe, some just get more air-time than others.

[Vladimir]

So what's the worst case senario? Israel AND Hizzibo are terrorists organizations? If that's the case which one would you rather have? Which one is less of a direct threat to you and your family?

[Pannonian]

So what's the worst case senario? Israel AND Hizzibo are terrorists organizations? If that's the case which one would you rather have? Which one is less of a direct threat to you and your family?
Israel is a nuclear power.

[Tribesman]

Every religion has it's wacko fringe, some just get more air-time than others.

Yeah as shown by Lucjan not knowing about them .
You would have thought that with all this alledged apperent anti-Isreal bias in the media you would get a lot more air time for the nuts , but so far since this current upsurge in violence started I have only seen the rabid rabbis come up 3 times , and two of those were in the Israeli press .

[Redleg]

Aseemble is a part of it. And as long as Hezbullah did the assemble, no one else could've manufactured.

And as before this is not correct. If the engine components are made in Iran, but the missile is assembled in Lebanon - the manufacturing process occured where?



It's attack is justified. BUT, not with all this damage and civilian deaths.
A result of careless war waged by both sides. If your going to claim one side is justified in its attack - then the other side is just as rightous in its attack in response. Hezbullah's attack was justified (IMO) because he wanted to free captives, and to do that he captived some soldiers. Now for Israel to free captives, it can free some of the already captured, that is to solve the whole matter. Or, attack Lebanon, captive some "soldiers" (Hezbullah men in this way), and then call for a trade. NOT rampage through the country killing everyone no matter what he/she thinks..


So Isreal is justified in responding to Hezbollah's attack using the same logic as presented here. You can not have justification of violence both ways.

Remember x-danger I have not justified neither side. I beleive both are wrong, my argument is against your justification of Hezbollah's actions.



If my answer to your question is irrelevant, then maybe your question is so?


Your getting warm....



Pointing out my so-called 'quibbles' is quibbling, avoiding questions and minapulating words is quibbling.

Again getting warm - now apply this comment to your emotional appeal postions.



Let's see:

I said Israel never freed captives without a trade, and I was wrong there. That is one. The others? (If you're going to say the UK/France thingy, I think you're wrong. Because mainly, I said Europe, you asked who specifacily, and I said maybe the UK).

Again getting warm -



You on the other hand, has called Hezbullah a Palestinian group, which makes for one for you, too.

Correct - emotional appeal was demonstrated once again to be its own refutation.



To clear your stance.

Haven't you figured it out yet. The Israeli-Palenstine, Israeli-Arab, Israili -Hezbollah are all so confused and convoluted (SP) that there is no clear stance other then to find both sides in the wrong because they all want to destory each other.



Wrong.. Then the wrong base is flowing out of..?


Read what is written - the answer is self evident. The base is from what is lawful and what is not lawful. Are you attempting to argue that there is no portion of the palenstine prisoners being held that were caught engaging in criminal activity.



Since when the death and capture of less than 10 soldiers is as disgusting as destroying a whole country?

Nice try again - but emotional appeal is its own refutation. You should pay better attention to what is written. Here try reading the statement again and pay attention to these two lines.

Hezbollah's actions are just as disgusting as Israels. The degree of damage is more for Israel but the nature of both is the same.



I said 100 times I hadn't heared about it on the TV.. And blame me not, am not very good at gathering news on the net 0-i


Selective input of information is indeed the fault of the person who does not delve into the issue. Again you have demonstrated that emotional appeal is its own refutation. You should read the Thomas Jefferson quote in my signature, it applies to the visual media of today even more so then the written media of Thomas Jefferson's time.



Your original statement implied a usual, better said, continous missile attacks.. Note though, some of those links say that no missiles have been launched after 2000, and the one that does, shows that less than 10 of those were Katyoshas..

The orginial statement was an emotional appeal, to demonstrate that the type of arguement is its own refutation. It seems that you did not read the paragraph in its entirity.



So you suggest Hezbullah should just sit and take the hits?

are you attempting to suggest that Israel should just sit and take the hits?

If your not reading the statement in its entirity and jumping to conclusions not there - you will be once again demonstrating that emotional appeal is its own refutation.




So you state all arabian channels are pro-Hezbullah?

Leaping to false conclusions, hiding it behind a question does not change what was written. Read the statement again and place it in the context of your statement in which it was in response to.

[Vladimir]

Israel is a nuclear power.

Oh I see, so Europe has to worry about being nuked by Israel. Look at how Iran's proxy, Hezbollah acts and tell me if you want Iran to become a nuclear nation.

[Redleg]

Every religion has it's wacko fringe, some just get more air-time than others.

Yeah as shown by Lucjan not knowing about them .
You would have thought that with all this alledged apperent anti-Isreal bias in the media you would get a lot more air time for the nuts , but so far since this current upsurge in violence started I have only seen the rabid rabbis come up 3 times , and two of those were in the Israeli press .

One of those wouldn't be the fringe group that claimed to have kidnapped a palenstine civilian would it?

An interesting group that seems not have existed until just recently. :wall:

[Shaun]

Oh I see, so Europe has to worry about being nuked by Israel. Look at how Iran's proxy, Hezbollah acts and tell me if you want Iran to become a nuclear nation.

So are you saying that Iran is nothing better than a terrorist cell? So far there is no evidence of Iran supplying terrorists at all, nor a reason to believe that Iran would ever nuke Europe or America.

[Redleg]

So are you saying that Iran is nothing better than a terrorist cell? So far there is no evidence of Iran supplying terrorists at all, nor a reason to believe that Iran would ever nuke Europe or America.

what kind of evidence are you looking for there have been certain statements made, the last paragraph is one type of evidence.


On the world stage, Tehran always denied that it gave military support to Hizballah, a group that not only became notorious for kidnapping Westerners in Lebanon in the 1980s, but also for killing more than 240 U.S. soldiers in a 1983 suicide bombing of their Beirut barracks. It also hijacked a U.S. commercial airliner in 1985.

But inside Iran, figures such as Hassan Abbasi, a high-ranking commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps and head of the Islamic Republic's Doctrinal Strategic Center, openly spoke of the country's close ties with Hizballah. He described the group's activities as "sacred."

"If something can be done to terrorize and scare the camp of infidelity and the enemies of God and the people, such terror is sacred. This terrorism is sacred. Lebanon's Hizballah was trained by these very hands. Pay attention! Do you see these hands? Hizballah, Hamas, and Islamic Jihad were trained by these very hands," Abbasi said.


http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iran/2005/iran-050311-rferl03.htm

Now I know verbal statements are not necessarily concrete proof of active support of terrorists, or even supplying terrorists but it does give some background information, and it does provide some evidence of direct support.

[Pannonian]

Oh I see, so Europe has to worry about being nuked by Israel. Look at how Iran's proxy, Hezbollah acts and tell me if you want Iran to become a nuclear nation.
How does Iran come into this? Your original conceit was that, in the worst case scenario, if both Israel and Hizzibo (sic) were both terrorist organisations, which one would I rather have, and which would be less of a direct threat to me and my family. I then pointed out that Israel is a nuclear power, and Hezbollah is not. Therefore if both are terrorist organisations, Israel would present an infinitely greater threat to me and my family than the impotent Hezbollah. If you don't like the answer, blame your question, not the replier.

Hezbollah and other anti-Israel organisations have actually made direct efforts to avoid targeting Europeans and people from other countries, such as Canada, whom they regard as friends. So when people of our nationalities are killed by one of their bombs, out come the apologies. And a couple of years ago, when a bus predominantly containing Europeans was hijacked, the hijackers apologised and let them go as soon as they could.

In contrast, several UK citizens have been shot by IDF soldiers, and the incidents covered up. Of the two that spring to mind, one was a peace campaigner, whose parents are still trying to get the Israeli government to admit their responsibility for the act. The other was a film director, who was filming a documentary at the time.

http://www.cpj.org/attacks03/mideast03/israel.html

[Tribesman]

One of those wouldn't be the fringe group that claimed to have kidnapped a palenstine civilian would it?

Nah the two Israeli ones were about a rally/protest and a radio interview, and the British one was about a nice group of brooklyn rabbis visiting the troops at the front to show their support , apperantly the troops were none to enamored by their support , perhaps the soldiers had read some of the writings of the rabbis and their followers on their website/forum where they describe the IDF as weak limp wristed pussies who should get out and hand over their weapons to real Jews .
Its very tempting to provide a link , but I think that would break forum rules ,

So for those that want to search for themselves visit the forum of the NY based terrorist group that is a proscribed organisation in both Israel and the US , Alternatively visit the forum of the banned Israeli party or its terrorist offshoot , you can get lots of crazy people there , and they ain't exactly Muslim .


An interesting group that seems not have existed until just recently.
Which one is that Red ? there have been so many splits these past couple of years its geting hard to keep up with them all . You could say they are just like the Palestinians with their hodge potch of ever changing ,dissapearing renaming and re-emerging groups .
The middle-east , dontyajustluvit:wall: :help: :shrug: :skull: :coffeenews:

[Redleg]

An interesting group that seems not have existed until just recently.
Which one is that Red ? there have been so many splits these past couple of years its geting hard to keep up with them all . You could say they are just like the Palestinians with their hodge potch of ever changing ,dissapearing renaming and re-emerging groups .
The middle-east , dontyajustluvit:wall: :help: :shrug: :skull: :coffeenews:

They have probably changed their name again but here is the link to the story I was refering to.


http://www.aljazeera.com/me.asp?service_ID=11749



An Israeli terror group called “Gilad Shalhevet Brigades” claimed responsibility for the kidnapping of two Palestinian residents of Jerusalem, and says it will not release them unless Palestinians holding Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit release him, Ynet News reported Saturday.



For those who will claim baised reporting - it also was reported in several different news prints across the world.

[Lucjan]

Every religion has it's wacko fringe, some just get more air-time than others.

Yeah as shown by Lucjan not knowing about them .
You would have thought that with all this alledged apperent anti-Isreal bias in the media you would get a lot more air time for the nuts , but so far since this current upsurge in violence started I have only seen the rabid rabbis come up 3 times , and two of those were in the Israeli press .

It's very clear to me that just about every group of people under the sun has a radical. I'm starting to understand though that there are those here who would rather point a finger at somebody else and call them ignorant than actually try to process their remark and offer a non-inflamatory responce.

[x-dANGEr]

And as before this is not correct. If the engine components are made in Iran, but the missile is assembled in Lebanon - the manufacturing process occured where?

Not in Iran.. Since manufacturing as you mentioned it is from the making of components to their assemble.

So Isreal is justified in responding to Hezbollah's attack using the same logic as presented here. You can not have justification of violence both ways.

The violence of one justifies the violence of each other, as long as it is all between those two. I'm cool with Israel's retaltiation, but not cool with all this destruction it is making against the parties that didn't attack them.

Again getting warm - now apply this comment to your emotional appeal postions.
You started the game, and I had to play along.

Haven't you figured it out yet. The Israeli-Palenstine, Israeli-Arab, Israili -Hezbollah are all so confused and convoluted (SP) that there is no clear stance other then to find both sides in the wrong because they all want to destory each other.
Seems a bit unfair..

Read what is written - the answer is self evident. The base is from what is lawful and what is not lawful. Are you attempting to argue that there is no portion of the palenstine prisoners being held that were caught engaging in criminal activity.
No I'm not, and I haven't.

Nice try again - but emotional appeal is its own refutation. You should pay better attention to what is written. Here try reading the statement again and pay attention to these two lines.

You said "Israeli actions are as disgusting as Hezbullah's".. Then, you say the damage degree is more for Israel.. SO, you think that how much damage does an act result in doesn't link to it's disgust?

Selective input of information is indeed the fault of the person who does not delve into the issue. Again you have demonstrated that emotional appeal is its own refutation. You should read the Thomas Jefferson quote in my signature, it applies to the visual media of today even more so then the written media of Thomas Jefferson's time.

After all, when the sun is set and the moon is awake, we can't authenicate any info we get. "War is a trick", "War is a lie".. All these arguments may afterall be built on false info, no matter how many sources you check.. The two who know the most about what's going on are the 2 generals on each side, and each one of those knows the least about the other side anyway..

The orginial statement was an emotional appeal, to demonstrate that the type of arguement is its own refutation. It seems that you did not read the paragraph in its entirity.
Nah I didn't.

are you attempting to suggest that Israel should just sit and take the hits?

To prevent such hits, release the captives. And if not; after taking the hit, the best course of action was to deal a trade.. You pick the one suits you best.


Leaping to false conclusions, hiding it behind a question does not change what was written. Read the statement again and place it in the context of your statement in which it was in response to.

I said I didn't "hear" the info about the "diversion" attack anywhere on the TV. You accused me of only believing what "pro-Hezbullah" channels say. And since I watch all the arabian channels and believe them, I suppose they are all "pro-Hezbullah".. Where are you trying to get to here?

One sollution for the best would be to give up all cards.. (Captives from Israel, captives from Lebanon) Both people helping each other in the repairs and opening the borders on each other.. (AI, Muslims are allowed into Al-Quds/Jerusalem, Palestinians get to have some electricity, some peace, some finanace, etc..)

Israel already has what it needs anyway.. Great finance, millitary and geographical position..

[Redleg]

Not in Iran.. Since manufacturing as you mentioned it is from the making of components to their assemble.

You might want to research some - evidence in the intelligence community points to manufacturing of parts by Iran and others. Shipped to Syria and then transported to Lebanon for assembly. This information is available on the web in many forms.



The violence of one justifies the violence of each other, as long as it is all between those two. I'm cool with Israel's retaltiation, but not cool with all this destruction it is making against the parties that didn't attack them.


Then you must also direct that anger at Hezbollah. THe Lebanese are caught in the middle.



You started the game, and I had to play along.


Actually you started the game with the emotional appeal arguements. Emotional appeal is its own refutation.



Seems a bit unfair..

All one has to do is look at history. Neither side is innocent in wanting the destruction of the other side. Its been the one consistent theme throughout all the conflicts involving Israel and others.



No I'm not, and I haven't.


Good



You said "Israeli actions are as disgusting as Hezbullah's".. Then, you say the damage degree is more for Israel.. SO, you think that how much damage does an act result in doesn't link to it's disgust?

The degree of damage does not influence if I am disgusted more at Hezbollah or Israel. Both are wrong in their actions in my opinion so I am equally disgusted with both.



After all, when the sun is set and the moon is awake, we can't authenicate any info we get. "War is a trick", "War is a lie".. All these arguments may afterall be built on false info, no matter how many sources you check.. The two who know the most about what's going on are the 2 generals on each side, and each one of those knows the least about the other side anyway..


This view is wrong in my opinion - it does not allow for the and individuals ability to check information by reviewing multiple sources from both sides looking for the facts contained in both, and reach a valid conclusion on what the facts really are. If your only willing to review information from one source, you fall into the trap of being feed information to meet the agenda's or baised views of that source. Multiple sources from different perspectives is the key.



To prevent such hits, release the captives. And if not; after taking the hit, the best course of action was to deal a trade.. You pick the one suits you best.

the best course of action would of been for Hezbollah to complie with the United Nations Resolution for disarming the militias and for Lebanon to have attempted to enforce the security zone as stated in that same resolution.

This would of insured that Israel would have had to release those captives from Lebanon.

However without Hezbollah disarming and Lebanon providing the required security zone the status of the area has not changed since the initial withdraw of Israel troops from South Lebanon. Hezbollah has not honored the conditions of the United Nations resolution - and neither has Israel. Both are still equally guilty in destroying Lebanon's peace.



I said I didn't "hear" the info about the "diversion" attack anywhere on the TV. You accused me of only believing what "pro-Hezbullah" channels say. And since I watch all the arabian channels and believe them, I suppose they are all "pro-Hezbullah".. Where are you trying to get to here?

Again leaping to false conclusions. Review what was written once again.



One sollution for the best would be to give up all cards.. (Captives from Israel, captives from Lebanon) Both people helping each other in the repairs and opening the borders on each other.. (AI, Muslims are allowed into Al-Quds/Jerusalem, Palestinians get to have some electricity, some peace, some finanace, etc..)

Ask yourself this question. Why should Israel grant open entry to any part of Israel to those who advocate its destruction as a state? Then ask yourself this one, Will the Palenstine people live side by side with the Israeli state?




Israel already has what it needs anyway.. Great finance, millitary and geographical position..

and told over and over again by certain states and groups that until its destroyed there will be no peace. So it seems Israel does not have what it needs. Peace, and security in the knowledge that its neighbors do not want its destructions. Now Israel is not helping itself with this issue either.

[Tribesman]

I'm starting to understand though that there are those here who would rather point a finger at somebody else and call them ignorant than actually try to process their remark and offer a non-inflamatory responce.
My response was not inflamatory , if you consider being told that you are wrong inflamatory then you are a very very over sensitive creature , which would be a strange trait for someone who appears to advocate genocide as a solution .

In your initial psot you give a nice preamble ....I can offer only my opinion as, what I perceive to be, a clear thinking, logical individual.
....
Yet you go on to show that your opinions in this matter are not logical or clearly thought out , so perhaps it is your perception that is at fault .
When faults in your clear thinking are pointed out you accuse others of ignorance , then go on to show that you are completely ignorant of facts about the issue on which you chose to write about .
edit to add for clarity .....I don't see rabbis pledging in the streets that all jews should cross the border and bomb palestinians, that does not happen.
............It's very clear to me that just about every group of people under the sun has a radical.
So which is it ? do you clearly percieve the contradiction there ?


Redleg , don't you think that groups chosen name is a bit of an insult to the family of the kidnapped soldier , considering the stance they (the family) have taken (despite widespread criticism in Israel) since he was taken .

[Redleg]

Redleg , don't you think that groups chosen name is a bit of an insult to the family of the kidnapped soldier , considering the stance they (the family) have taken (despite widespread criticism in Israel) since he was taken .

Oh I think its more then an insult toward the family and the soldier. It also shows how absurd the extremists on both sides have become.
It also demonstrates why both sides of the conflict have become just as guilty of using senseless violence and provocation to attempt to bring about the destruction of the other side.

Rather pathic of them.

[Redleg]

Double Post

[x-dANGEr]

the best course of action would of been for Hezbollah to complie with the United Nations Resolution for disarming the militias and for Lebanon to have attempted to enforce the security zone as stated in that same resolution.
I think Hezbullah, Lebanon, Hamas and Palestine all have little trust and faith in Israel.. Any idea why?

The degree of damage does not influence if I am disgusted more at Hezbollah or Israel. Both are wrong in their actions in my opinion so I am equally disgusted with both.

So you feel the same disgust for one who slapped another person, and who killed another person? (Since they both used violence)

This view is wrong in my opinion - it does not allow for the and individuals ability to check information by reviewing multiple sources from both sides looking for the facts contained in both, and reach a valid conclusion on what the facts really are. If your only willing to review information from one source, you fall into the trap of being feed information to meet the agenda's or baised views of that source. Multiple sources from different perspectives is the key.


It is right. As, as long as you're not in the scene, many things can be wrong, understood wrong, interepted wrong, etc..

Again leaping to false conclusions. Review what was written once again.

I did and it matched what I said.

Ask yourself this question. Why should Israel grant open entry to any part of Israel to those who advocate its destruction as a state? Then ask yourself this one, Will the Palenstine people live side by side with the Israeli state?

Answering the first question: There should be only few.. If Israel does all that, people will want peace, and the image of Israel will go a lot better.. Even, if any extermist groups remain on the scene, the Palestinian people would help Israel to remove them..

The second one: I can't see why not if access to all lands is given from both sides, and Jerusalem be accesible from Palestinians as well, and at the end, if Israel (And the other countries) helps re-build the huge destruction it has made..

and told over and over again by certain states and groups that until its destroyed there will be no peace. So it seems Israel does not have what it needs. Peace, and security in the knowledge that its neighbors do not want its destructions. Now Israel is not helping itself with this issue either.
Then I think Israel's politics are stupid, and the acts of a 5 years old are better.. Israel is fighting an ideological war with military arms.. Intelligent? Nah.. If Israel really wants peace, it can as I said dis-arm all the extremist groups of their support by being on the people's good side.

[Redleg]

I think Hezbullah, Lebanon, Hamas and Palestine all have little trust and faith in Israel.. Any idea why?

For all except Lebanon - probably for the same reason Israel distrusts them. Hamas,the Palestine Authority, and Hezbollah have demonstrated time and time again that they also can not be trusted.



So you feel the same disgust for one who slapped another person, and who killed another person? (Since they both used violence)


Incorrect comparision - since both sides are using the sam type of violence - death.



It is right. As, as long as you're not in the scene, many things can be wrong, understood wrong, interepted wrong, etc..

I have been on the scene of several different violent confrontations - and at the scene your ability to judge information is even more restricted, in fact your statement here applies more to those on the ground then it does to use sitting in the grandstands watching the events unfold.

Again your not sitting in Palenstine or Lebanon right now - so your ability to gather information is more then that of the person sitting in the middle of the violence.



I did and it matched what I said.


Then you are stuck in a paridigm of your own making. I can not prevent you from having baised views and seeing what you wish to see, But your statement here indicates that your preception is clouded.



Answering the first question: There should be only few.. If Israel does all that, people will want peace, and the image of Israel will go a lot better.. Even, if any extermist groups remain on the scene, the Palestinian people would help Israel to remove them..

This can not happen while a group in power in Palenstine continues to call for the destruction of the Israeli state. So Israel is in a catch 22 postion - damn if they do and damn if they don't.



The second one: I can't see why not if access to all lands is given from both sides, and Jerusalem be accesible from Palestinians as well, and at the end, if Israel (And the other countries) helps re-build the huge destruction it has made..

Again review the manifesto of the Palenstine group that is in power in the Palenstine Authority. This group has made some overtures to removing the call for the destruction of the state of Israel from their manifesto - but the recent actions of the violent armed wing of Hammas demonstrate something else entirely. Will the Palenstine people be willing to apologize to Israel for supporting Hamas and other terror groups suicide bombings of innocent children and women? The Palenstine people are not innocent as a group in this conflict either. Then since you want to mention other countries - there are many Arab countries that also should help rebuild the huge destruction that it has helped cause....

Now this same arguement can be applied to Hezbollah for the destruction it has helped cause in Lebanon by its childish actions.



Then I think Israel's politics are stupid, and the acts of a 5 years old are better.. Israel is fighting an ideological war with military arms.. Intelligent? Nah.. If Israel really wants peace, it can as I said dis-arm all the extremist groups of their support by being on the people's good side.

The exact same thing should be said of Hamas, the PLO, Hezbollah, and every Palenstine extremist group out there.

Again both sides in this conflict are equally responsible for carrying out the violence and destruction - especially for what is going on in Lebanon right now.

[x-dANGEr]

Incorrect comparision - since both sides are using the sam type of violence - death.
So, killing 1 man is as disgusting as killing 100000000 men?

Then you are stuck in a paridigm of your own making. I can not prevent you from having baised views and seeing what you wish to see, But your statement here indicates that your preception is clouded.

Stop quibbling and read:


Do you deny the fact that a missile strike on civilian targets was done concurrent with the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers as a diversion?

Well, every news channel here hasn't mentioned a thing about it. So, I dont believe it, but still don't deny it.

So unless a pro-Hezbollah site states that Hezbollah launced a diversionary attack at civilian targets it can not be true? Hmm and who used the term propaganda in another thread first?

So you state all arabian channels are pro-Hezbullah?
Leaping to false conclusions, hiding it behind a question does not change what was written. Read the statement again and place it in the context of your statement in which it was in response to.

I said I didn't "hear" the info about the "diversion" attack anywhere on the TV. You accused me of only believing what "pro-Hezbullah" channels say. And since I watch all the arabian channels and believe them, I suppose they are all "pro-Hezbullah".. Where are you trying to get to here?
Again leaping to false conclusions. Review what was written once again.

I did and it matched what I said
Then you are stuck in a paridigm of your own making. I can not prevent you from having baised views and seeing what you wish to see, But your statement here indicates that your preception is clouded.

As you can see from above, I was talking about channels, you changed the subject into sites.. ?!

For all except Lebanon - probably for the same reason Israel distrusts them. Hamas,the Palestine Authority, and Hezbollah have demonstrated time and time again that they also can not be trusted.
I'm not sure about the second part of your sentence, but I'm sure that Israel can afford to free all the captives.. If anything goes wrong then, it simply can re-capture them.
This can not happen while a group in power in Palenstine continues to call for the destruction of the Israeli state. So Israel is in a catch 22 postion - damn if they do and damn if they don't.
They won't keep on wanting that if Israel gives all that..

Again review the manifesto of the Palenstine group that is in power in the Palenstine Authority. This group has made some overtures to removing the call for the destruction of the state of Israel from their manifesto - but the recent actions of the violent armed wing of Hammas demonstrate something else entirely. Will the Palenstine people be willing to apologize to Israel for supporting Hamas and other terror groups suicide bombings of innocent children and women? The Palenstine people are not innocent as a group in this conflict either. Then since you want to mention other countries - there are many Arab countries that also should help rebuild the huge destruction that it has helped cause....

Maybe you should ask: "Will the Israeli people be willing to apologize to Palestine for the supprt of the "bomb" bombers Israel has done?"

Here, in that last quote you show contrary to yourself.. You think that both of them are at fault, but you say 1 side should apologize (The weaker one BTW) and the other not?!

The exact same thing should be said of Hamas, the PLO, Hezbollah, and every Palenstine extremist group out there.

I can't udnerstand how would Hamas or Hezbullah do that?!

[Redleg]

So, killing 1 man is as disgusting as killing 100000000 men?

The act of violent death is enough rather it be one or 10,000,000. The degree is only in amount, the evil is in the deed.



Stop quibbling and read:


Again you need to read - did I state all Arab news sites are pro-Hezbollah? Those are your words not mine. You might want to check out what quibble means. Nice try though...



As you can see from above, I was talking about channels, you changed the subject into sites.. ?!

Channels and news sites are the same in the aspect that it provides news media. If you assumed that they mean different things then what I stated then that is your issue not mine. Again did I state specifically that all arab channells are pro-hezbollah? It seems you are having a problem looking outside of your own baised paridigm.



I'm not sure about the second part of your sentence, but I'm sure that Israel can afford to free all the captives.. If anything goes wrong then, it simply can re-capture them.They won't keep on wanting that if Israel gives all that..


So are you now attempting to deny the violence done against Israel by Hamas and Hezabollah.... It seems Hezbollah and Hamas are caught in the same moral and ethical problem that Israel is caught in.



Maybe you should ask: "Will the Israeli people be willing to apologize to Palestine for the supprt of the "bomb" bombers Israel has done?"


I don't support Israel's actions - so no need for me to ask myself that question. However you continue to attempt to justify the violence of Hamas and Hezbollah.



Here, in that last quote you show contrary to yourself.. You think that both of them are at fault, but you say 1 side should apologize (The weaker one BTW) and the other not?!

You failed to understand the statement - you should read it again. Your claim was that Israel should apologize - the converse is that Hamas and Hezbollah has some apologies of their own to state.



I can't udnerstand how would Hamas or Hezbullah do that?!

Then you are not willing to look outside of the paridigm that you have established for the Middle-east as it relates to Israel. And hince that is the crux of your issue. I find fault with both equally because both are doing violence against each other. In fact both Hamas and Hezbollah have political rethoric that calls for the destruction of Israel, and Israel conducts violence against both. Its a vicious little circle continued by both sides equally.

[Banquo's Ghost]

The act of violent death is enough rather it be one or 10,000,000. The degree is only in amount, the evil is in the deed.


I would like to interrupt the dialogue for a moment to express my support and admiration for your concise and eloquent position.

If only the combatants could understand. :bow:

[Redleg]

I would like to interrupt the dialogue for a moment to express my support and admiration for your concise and eloquent position.

If only the combatants could understand. :bow:

Thanks -

[x-dANGEr]

You failed to understand the statement - you should read it again. Your claim was that Israel should apologize - the converse is that Hamas and Hezbollah has some apologies of their own to state.
I didn't state that Israel should apologize, check again.

Channels and news sites are the same in the aspect that it provides news media. If you assumed that they mean different things then what I stated then that is your issue not mine. Again did I state specifically that all arab channells are pro-hezbollah? It seems you are having a problem looking outside of your own baised paridigm.

You didn't state so specifically, but saying that I only believe news when they are on pro-Hezbullah channels, and sicne I watch all arabic news channels and believe all what goes in them, you simply say that all the news channels I watch and believe is pro-Hezbullah.

It is like saying: All what you play is crap, and since I play like all the Unreal Tournament colletction, you're simply saying that all the UT collection is crap.


The act of violent death is enough rather it be one or 10,000,000. The degree is only in amount, the evil is in the deed.
That's not what the world is based on I see.

Then you are not willing to look outside of the paridigm that you have established for the Middle-east as it relates to Israel. And hince that is the crux of your issue. I find fault with both equally because both are doing violence against each other. In fact both Hamas and Hezbollah have political rethoric that calls for the destruction of Israel, and Israel conducts violence against both. Its a vicious little circle continued by both sides equally.
I'm willing to, outside the so-called ..

You know how, then tell me please.

[Geoffrey S]

Some 420 Lebanese have been killed, of which some 30 weren't civilians. 51 Israelis have died, of which 18 were civilians.

Once more, makes the line between terror and state a little more blurry.

[Redleg]

I didn't state that Israel should apologize, check again.

Then I made an incorrect assumption based upon the course of the discussion.



You didn't state so specifically, but saying that I only believe news when they are on pro-Hezbullah channels, and sicne I watch all arabic news channels and believe all what goes in them, you simply say that all the news channels I watch and believe is pro-Hezbullah.

Ah so you attempted to generalize a statement to mean something else. It seem I was guilty of that in the previsous question about apologize, and I am even willing to state so without quibbling my way out of it.



It is like saying: All what you play is crap, and since I play like all the Unreal Tournament colletction, you're simply saying that all the UT collection is crap.


The generalization of all did you in here. I happen to read a lot of arab english based media - but there is no way I can read them all. Then again there is no way you play all of the characters either now is there....



That's not what the world is based on I see.

Then I would suggest that you go and clean up the dead of your enemy. It changes the world view of death quickly. A suggestion that should be given to all combatants in this conflict. When you as a soldier have to recover the dead women and children of your enemy - it becomes very difficult to see them as less then human.



I'm willing to, outside the so-called ..

You know how, then tell me please.

It primarily calls for the willingness to change. In this instance it requires one to activily look for material and information from outside their previous channells, and to give it an honest evaluation.

Sadly neither Israel, Hezbollah, nor Hamas have demonstrated that willingness to change yet either.

[x-dANGEr]

Which is why we are still having this argument.. ~:(

I appriciate your straight forward attidue and will promise to try and pay you back with the same.

Honestly, I'm thinking this "war" is turning out good now.. Israel is learning that she can't just invade a country and expect nothing back..

Yes, a lot of Lebanese are killed, and the country is kinda ruined.. Call me a maniac, but I got used to this bloodshed.. ~:(

[Redleg]

Which is why we are still having this argument.. ~:(

I appriciate your straight forward attidue and will promise to try and pay you back with the same.

No problem



Honestly, I'm thinking this "war" is turning out good now.. Israel is learning that she can't just invade a country and expect nothing back..


And what is Hezbollah learning from this particlur episode?

Because if Hezbollah does not learn a painful lesson from this - the violence will only continue.



Yes, a lot of Lebanese are killed, and the country is kinda ruined.. Call me a maniac, but I got used to this bloodshed.. ~:(

Hince your porblem and that of those who advocate bloodshed to drive the state of Israel into the sea. It did not work in 1948, and it has not worked in any of the wars since then.

[x-dANGEr]

What Hezbullah learnt? Nothing.. I guess so, at least.

[kataphraktoi]

Honestly, I'm thinking this "war" is turning out good now.. Israel is learning that she can't just invade a country and expect nothing back..

You think Israel likes invading countries?

Then tell those idiots Hizbollah to stop shelling Israeli territory and kidnapping soldiers then perhaps Israel won't resort to reckless and destructive disproportionate responses.

Its the fault of the Arab states who used the Israeli - Palestinian conflict to boost their own image and popularity in their own states by keeping Palestinian deliberately poor - which became a breeding ground for extremism. If only they followed the example of Jordan - called COMMON SENSE.

[x-dANGEr]

You think Israel likes invading countries?

I think "Israel loves invading countries" would be a better description.

Then tell those idiots Hizbollah to stop shelling Israeli territory and kidnapping soldiers then perhaps Israel won't resort to reckless and destructive disproportionate responses.

It is funny you use the word "kidnap", they are soldiers, and there wasn't any peace treaty between Hezbullah and Israel (Israeli army did cross the borders ocassionaly, leading into your assumpted "shellings"), I think it should be called capture.

Its the fault of the Arab states who used the Israeli - Palestinian conflict to boost their own image and popularity in their own states by keeping Palestinian deliberately poor - which became a breeding ground for extremism. If only they followed the example of Jordan - called COMMON SENSE.

You think the Arabic countries' images are good? You think they are popular amongst their people? Gah.. Think again!

[Tribesman]

Oh well the IDF did another nice one in Qana . A lovely pile of dismembered children to add to the tally .
Still at least they were only in their homes this time and not sheltering in a UN compound , so there is some improvement .

Now the official line is that they work on the assumption that there are no civilians there , after all they did give a warning so anyone left in the village must be a terrorist right .
Yet they also say that they estimate 20% of the population are unable to evacuate (though the UN says up to 46%)
So which is it , 1 in 5 of the population are still there , or none of the population apart from terrorists are still there ?
Or can anyone explain the justification of blowing up an apartment block based on an assumption ?

Birth pangs of a new middle east!!!!!!!Bollox:furious3:
Is it any wonder that the Lebanese government have told Condi to go take a flying **** this morning .

[Beirut]

Was re-reading a bio of General Sherman the other day and came across this.

In 1864, while General Sherman and his Union army were at the gates of Atlanta, there was an exchange of letters betwen him and General Hood of the Confederate army who was defending Atlanta. There are interesting analogies between their arguments then and the arguments today about Lebanon.

Sherman, wanting Atlanta, but also wanting to avoid both killing everyone in the city and, more importantly perhaps, needing to garrison the city, proposed to deport all the inhabitants by train. He wrote to Hood that he expected him to assist.

Sherman:
"If you consent, I propose to remove all of the families... "

Hood:
"And now, sir, permit me to say that the unprecedented measure you propose, transcends, in studied and ingenious cruelty, all acts ever before brought to my attention in the dark history of war. In the name of God and humanity I protest... "

Sherman:
"In the name of common sense, if we must be enemies, let us be men, and fight it out as we propose to do, and not deal in hypocritical appeals to God and humanity."

"You defended Atlanta on a line so close to the town that every cannon-shot that overshot their mark went into the habitations of women and children."

Hood:
"I have too good an opinion of the skill of your atillerists, to credit the insinuation that for several weeks they unintentionally fired too high for my modest fieldwork."

It should be noted that Sherman gave orders on approach to Atlanta, "If fired on from the forts or buildings of Atlanta, no consideration must be paid to the fact that they are occupied by families, but they must be cannonaded without the formality of demand."

Sherman's intention was to "make Georgia howl." The Israelis, it seems, want to make Lebanon howl for the same reasons. As does Hezbollah (Iran & Syria) with Israel.

If we look to the past for understanding of the present, keeping in mind Sun-Tzu's dictum that all warfare is based on deception, and Hiram Johnson's remark that the first casualty when war comes is truth, the end result is that both parties in the the Lebanese conflict are lying to their advantage, and both are practicing Sherman's style of "total war", targeting the population and the infrastructure without regard for anything but victory.

I'm not making any moral judgements or even taking sides other than observing that every civilian on both sides that was killed (including UN personel) was killed on purpose for a purpose. The propaganda aspect of total war has not been forgotten by either side. The idea that either side is being gentle or measured or wishing to avoid civilian deaths in any way is nonsense and contrary to the truth that the first tenet of war is to win.


:lebanon: Everyone out of Lebanon except the Lebanese! :lebanon:

[Joker85]

Oh well the IDF did another nice one in Qana . A lovely pile of dismembered children to add to the tally .
Still at least they were only in their homes this time and not sheltering in a UN compound , so there is some improvement .

Now the official line is that they work on the assumption that there are no civilians there , after all they did give a warning so anyone left in the village must be a terrorist right .
Yet they also say that they estimate 20% of the population are unable to evacuate (though the UN says up to 46%)
So which is it , 1 in 5 of the population are still there , or none of the population apart from terrorists are still there ?
Or can anyone explain the justification of blowing up an apartment block based on an assumption ?

Birth pangs of a new middle east!!!!!!!Bollox:furious3:
Is it any wonder that the Lebanese government have told Condi to go take a flying **** this morning .

Oopsy, new video shows rockets being launched from that building. 100 have been launched from the immediate area.

Of course it's not hezbollah's fault for using human shields to protect their rocket launches.

Those israelis should just shutup and die. How dare they respond to 100 rockets being launched from a building.

[orangat]

Oopsy, new video shows rockets being launched from that building. 100 have been launched from the immediate area.

Of course it's not hezbollah's fault for using human shields to protect their rocket launches.

Those israelis should just shutup and die. How dare they respond to 100 rockets being launched from a building.

The "hiding among civilians" myth
"Israel claims it's justified in bombing civilians because Hezbollah mingles with them. In fact, the militant group doesn't trust its civilians and stays as far away from them as possible.

By Mitch Prothero........."
http://archive.salon.com/news/feature/2006/07/28/hezbollah/index_np.html

[Quietus]

Oh well the IDF did another nice one in Qana . A lovely pile of dismembered children to add to the tally .
Still at least they were only in their homes this time and not sheltering in a UN compound , so there is some improvement .

Now the official line is that they work on the assumption that there are no civilians there , after all they did give a warning so anyone left in the village must be a terrorist right .
Yet they also say that they estimate 20% of the population are unable to evacuate (though the UN says up to 46%)
So which is it , 1 in 5 of the population are still there , or none of the population apart from terrorists are still there ?
Or can anyone explain the justification of blowing up an apartment block based on an assumption ?

Birth pangs of a new middle east!!!!!!!Bollox:furious3:
Is it any wonder that the Lebanese government have told Condi to go take a flying **** this morning . Fifty seven dead (34 children) by last count. The Israeli military is way too vicious. :embarassed:

They stopped attacking Bint Jbail where the militants are then continue killiing scores of civilians....

[Joker85]

The "hiding among civilians" myth
"Israel claims it's justified in bombing civilians because Hezbollah mingles with them. In fact, the militant group doesn't trust its civilians and stays as far away from them as possible.

By Mitch Prothero........."
http://archive.salon.com/news/feature/2006/07/28/hezbollah/index_np.html

Yes, video of rockets being launched from the building is a "myth".

Of course, who needs evidence of that, you have a salon.com link.

How silly of me.

Death to israel and all that...

[orangat]

Yes, video of rockets being launched from the building is a "myth".

Of course, who needs evidence of that, you have a salon.com link.

How silly of me.

Death to israel and all that...

No the rockets originating from the building is not a myth but is it fair for Israel to be bombing civilian infrastructure and refugee convoys all this while just because of this single incident?.

The red cross painted on top of ambulances have been used in cynical fashion as crosshairs to blow them up with guided missiles. Does this video of Hezbollah firing rockets from Qana suddenly 'wiped the slate clean'?

[Gawain of Orkeny]

The red cross painted on top of ambulances have been used in cynical fashion as crosshairs to blow them up with guided missiles. Does this video of Hezbollah firing rockets from Qana suddenly 'wiped the slate clean'?

Check out this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqGjz7iJTns)

[orangat]

Check out this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqGjz7iJTns)

Check out the date added of the video - 'March 11, 2006'

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Check out the date added of the video - 'March 11, 2006'

Its in Gazza. Do you have a point? Im not saying it happened yesterday in Lebanon.

[x-dANGEr]

Its in Gazza. Do you have a point? Im not saying it happened yesterday in Lebanon.
Do you have a point? Irrelevancy alert!