Israel/Lebanon/Hezbollah Crisis Thread was the "Is Israel right" thread

Hobbes

UN asked for 72 hour ceasefire to get civillians out of the firing line. Israel told them more or less to feck off.

redspider

I was asked by a news media organisation this morning to give my opinion on the Israel/Hezbollah current conflict/escalation. What was interesting is that they wanted to know my opinion on who started it!

I find this line of questioning misguided. This is a complex issue, and like two boys who are fighting constantly, its not a case of who started it. Thats a line that Bush throws out, and is feeding the US public and the world. If you buy that Hezbollah 'started it', you have no clue about the overall situation.

First, think about 1948 and how Israel was created, how Palestinians were forced from their land, and killed! Israel is a 'false' creation and the Palestinian peopls have been treated as badly as Jewish people were treated in the 2nd world war - both were wrong, and are wrong. The Holocaust is over, but the misteatment of Paletinians and Arabs by the Israel state is not over. The US encourage them to do so. Britain encouraged them in the begining in 1947/48/49, etc.

The current escalation was as a result of the 8 Israeli soldiers that were killed. But strategically it may just have been the catalyst. It looks like Isarel had this activity planned to a certain extent. Lebanese people, Arabs, are caught up but are not neutral. Arabs, whether in Lebanon, in Palestine, in Syria, Iraq, etc, are related historically and culturally and in terms of religion. Lebanon was also a state that was created, as was Jordan, Syria and Iraq. So was Israel, and with force.

The place is a mess, and needs to be sorted out peacefully. It is possible. Israel bombing bridges, houses, airports, power stations, roads, cars, tucks, civilians, women, children and even Hezbollah (freedom fighters/terrorists) is not a way to solve the problem. Nor is Hezbollahd rockets landing at soft Israeli targets, nor fighting face to face with the Israeli army. In fact, these actions are making the situation worse, for ordinary Israeli's (who according to the Jerusalem Post newspaper support the action by 85%. Lets hope that 15% swell .... The US invasion of Iraq had similar support at the start but that is now well down) and Arabs.

But while the world's slow cogs move to solve the problem, which has been festering since 1948, and was a problem before that, people on both sides will keep getting killed, maimed, injured, etc and lmany millions will be iving in fear of that.

Both sides are wrong, it doesnt matter who started it. Lets solve the problem.

Why is this world so stupid and infantile ?

redspider

Diogenes

redspider wrote:

Yes, I noticed that too. My moral 'compass' equates everybody's lives on this planet as equal. However, not everyone thinks this way, especially people of one half of warring peoples. But most of people are guilty of that approach, local lives mean more than distant ones.
Redspider

Not really I think everyone is outraged by the civilian deaths. However the UN outpost is a perfect example of Israeli indifference to anything that gets in the way. If a group of Somali rebels, or Iraqi insurgents attacked a UN outpost it would not be shocking or surprising. However for a supposed "civilised" western member of the international community to display rank indifference to the UN flag and the people operating beneath it, well it's just a perfect demostration of Israeli' obliviousness to anything approximating morality. And it clearly demostrates that they are no better than whom the fight.

redspider

Diogenes wrote:

I think everyone is outraged by the civilian deaths. However the UN outpost is a perfect example of Israeli indifference to anything that gets in the way. If a group of Somali rebels, or Iraqi insurgents attacked a UN outpost it would not be shocking or surprising. However for a supposed "civilised" western member of the international community to display rank indifference to the UN flag and the people operating beneath it, well it's just a perfect demostration of Israeli' obliviousness to anything approximating morality. And it clearly demostrates that they are no better than whom the fight.

I agree that Israel is no better than Hezbollah, but comparisons like this are always doomed to failure. Both sides are wrong, and its subjective as to who is the most wrong, as well as being a pointless exercise. I totally agree that States should not resort to terrorism, but they do, time and time again, not only Israel.

But I wish it were the case that all lives were seen as equal, but they are not. Examples, well, the 4 UN deaths outraged many, including China, yet deaths of other people did not. At the same time no doubt the US were killing 4 people and who knows how many more in Iraq, yet China was not equally as outraged. There were Palestinian deaths around the same days, much more than 4, again, no outrage, and how many deaths did the 'Shock and Awe' invasion of Iraq cause, much more than 4 at a UN post. And there was clearly no outrage shown by China for the first 4 deaths, or the first 4,000, 40,000 and its much higher than that!

Another simple example, if the US was being bombarded by jet fighters every night and people being killed at the same rate as people in Lebanon are being killed as I write this, the people of the US would be morally outraged, and rightly so. As they are not morally outraged when it is people in Lebanon, that shows that for them those lives are not equal.

We live on a planet where the Human populace has allowed a system or systems to be put in place which are in fact stupid! If you wanted to do Terraforming, this would be an example of how not to do it!

redspider

Sgt. Sensible

Hobbes wrote:

UN asked for 72 hour ceasefire to get civillians out of the firing line. Israel told them more or less to feck off.

Israeli Justice Minister wrote:

Everyone in southern Lebanon is a terrorist and is connected to Hizbollah.

Daily Telegraph.

New_Departure06

Those of us who warned that Israel's OTT blitzkrieg would fuel support for Hezbollah have been proven correct. Israel should switch to diplomacy and should have given it a chance:

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/world/2006/0729/1154075749534.html

Poll shows anger at Israeli actions
Michael Jansen in Beirut
Many if not most Lebanese were initially critical of the Shia Hizbullah movement for provoking the wrath of Israel by seizing two of its soldiers on June 12th. But the director of the Beirut Centre for Research and Information, Abdo Saad, notes: "The public mood changed once people realised Israel is going only for soft targets like bridges, roads, civilian homes, ambulances, vans and cars. Ninety-five per cent of Lebanese casualties are civilians."

According to the centre's survey of opinion in all Lebanon's communities, most Lebanese support Hizbullah and condemn Israel for its attack in response to the capture of the soldiers.

Seventy per cent approve of the operation to seize the soldiers to secure the release of Lebanese held in Israeli jails for more than 20 years. Fifty-five per cent of Christians favour Hizbullah's action, although this community has been largely critical of the movement. Indeed, right-wing elements in the Maronite Christian community co-operated with Israel during its 22-year occupation of south Lebanon and during the 1982 offensive which carried the Israeli army into Beirut.


Eighty-seven per cent of respondents support Hizbullah in its confrontation with Israel.

Sixty-three per cent do not believe Israel can defeat Hizbullah and 90 per cent do not believe the US is an honest broker. However, 35 per cent think the US and Israel will impose their conditions on Lebanon in exchange for a ceasefire, while 57 per cent say the US and Israel will not succeed in such an endeavour.

The fact that Hizbullah has managed to halt Israel's ground offensive, in spite of Israel's overwhelming military superiority, has also contributed to this change of opinion. "This is the first time Israel is not fighting its war on Arab territory," says Mr Saad. "Hizbullah is hitting Israeli towns and villages."

Diogenes

redspider wrote:

But I wish it were the case that all lives were seen as equal, but they are not. Examples, well, the 4 UN deaths outraged many, including China, yet deaths of other people did not. At the same time no doubt the US were killing 4 people and who knows how many more in Iraq, yet China was not equally as outraged. There were Palestinian deaths around the same days, much more than 4, again, no outrage, and how many deaths did the 'Shock and Awe' invasion of Iraq cause, much more than 4 at a UN post. And there was clearly no outrage shown by China for the first 4 deaths, or the first 4,000, 40,000 and its much higher than that!

I'm not sure if I find the naivete of this statement charming or frustrating. If you expect the international community to express the eqaul level of outrage for every Israeli assault, for every Sunni suicide bomber, for US "friendly fire incident", for every Hezoballah rocket attack, for every Sudanese milita attack, well for starts, I fear for the future of the rain forest because of the blizard of press releases that would quickly mount up in reuter's fax machine.

Secondly the words are just going to lose meaning. If you get "mad as hell and not taking it anymore" at the first sign of violence, unless you put your money where your mouth is, and send UN troops anywhere there's the remotest start to hostilies then, getting hot and bothered is quickly going to lose any signifigance.


Finally in real terms what business is it for China to step into the arena and lecture Israeli on an attack that really does nothing to affect China in any real sense? However an assault on a UN outpost gives the Chinese, and the rest of the UN an excuse to butt in. Israeli isn't some group of terrorists the have a seat at the UN, and by attacking a UN outpost, the rest of the UN has a reason to bend Israeli's ear.

It's called politics.

Another simple example, if the US was being bombarded by jet fighters every night and people being killed at the same rate as people in Lebanon are being killed as I write this, the people of the US would be morally outraged, and rightly so. As they are not morally outraged when it is people in Lebanon, that shows that for them those lives are not equal.

I'm pretty sure anyone is going to have stronger feeling about getting bombed, when they're the ones getting bombed, that ones pretty much a given. :rolleyes:

The US was attacked, they reacted in a fairly vicious way. The lebanese were attacked (or kidnapped a soldier, I'm getting into this he started playground nonsense) and they are responsing in kind. The difference is the US has more weapons and money at it's disposal.

We live on a planet where the Human populace has allowed a system or systems to be put in place which are in fact stupid! If you wanted to do Terraforming, this would be an example of how not to do it!

redspider

If I wanted what now? Huh?

LostinBlanch

I found a good quote that I think sums up the situation quite well. It's from the letters page in todays independent, and the writer quotes Ghandi:

"What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty and democracy"?

Manic Moran

New_Departure06 wrote:

Those of us who warned that Israel's OTT blitzkrieg would fuel support for Hezbollah have been proven correct. Israel should switch to diplomacy and should have given it a chance:

An analysis piece in a Saudi newspaper a few days ago predicted general anger at Israel and support for Hezbullah in the short term, particularly while the bombs are dropping, but that over time after the bombs stopped falling it would change to more anger at Hezbullah for disturbing the quite profitable peace they had been enjoying.

NTM

hmmm

New_Departure06 wrote:

Those of us who warned that Israel's OTT blitzkrieg would fuel support for Hezbollah have been proven correct. Israel should switch to diplomacy and should have given it a chance:

Hizbollah want to destroy the state of Israel. How would you propose diplomacy should work here? Meet them half way and only allow half of Israel to be destroyed?

New_Departure06

hmmm wrote:

Hizbollah want to destroy the state of Israel. How would you propose diplomacy should work here? Meet them half way and only allow half of Israel to be destroyed?

A country with nuclear weapons does not face an existential threat and to claim otherwise is to remain stuck in a 1940's-60's timewarp. Negotiate and as seen in NI hardline positions can erode. And anyway, A Hezbollah woman said on RTE Radio 1 recently that the aim was a prisoner swap. Also Israel is occupying the Lebanese Sheeba Farms. Israel must withdraw from illegal occupied territory as demanded by UN resolutions including West Bank, East Jerusalem, Gaza, Golan and Sheeba. They are not part of Israel in the eyes of the UN according to the 1948 boundaries.

Israel will soon breach Hitler's 50:1 ratio soon.

Hobbes

hmmm wrote:

Hizbollah want to destroy the state of Israel.

I think your confusing them with someone else (probably the hardliners in Iran). Thier goal is to stop the Israel occupation of Lebanon.

Between now and 2000 was the only time Israel wasn't in the Lebanon (before 1982 was the other time).

So its not like they magically appeared with the goal to destroy Israel.

Slainte70

New_Departure06 wrote:

Also Israel is occupying the Lebanese Sheeba Farms.

United Nations wrote:
"On 15 May 2000, the United Nations received a map, dated 1966, from the Government of Lebanon which reflected the Government's position that these farmlands were located in Lebanon. However, the United Nations is in possession of 10 other maps issued after 1966 by various Lebanese government institutions, including the Ministry of Defense and the army, all of which place the farmlands inside the Syrian Arab Republic. The United Nations has also examined six maps issued by the Government of the Syrian Arab Republic, including three maps since 1966, which place the farmlands inside the Syrian Arab Republic."

It's kinda funny if you say Sheba Farms belong to Lebanon, why did Syria conveniently forget to inform the UN that Sheba Farms belongs to Lebanon.

Another load of crock to try and justify Hezbollah's attacks on Israel.

fly_agaric

New_Departure06 wrote:

Israel will soon breach Hitler's 50:1 ratio...

Do you think you could give the old Nazi/Israel analogies a decent burial now. It's kind of making my breakfast repeat on me a bit...

Manic Moran

Hobbes wrote:

I think your confusing them with someone else (probably the hardliners in Iran). Thier goal is to stop the Israel occupation of Lebanon.

No, their goals changed some time ago. The initial mandate was indeed just the liberation of Lebanon. Take a Google around, you'll see references to the new goals in anything from newspaper reports to government documents.

A country with nuclear weapons does not face an existential threat and to claim otherwise is to remain stuck in a 1940's-60's timewarp

Just who are Israel going to use nukes on when fighting Hezbullah? "Stop lobbing rockets at us, and using suicide bombers, or we'll nuke Southern Lebanon"? I don't see that happening.

NTM

Hobbes

Manic Moran wrote:

No, their goals changed some time ago. The initial mandate was indeed just the liberation of Lebanon. Take a Google around, you'll see references to the new goals in anything from newspaper reports to government documents.

Yep your correct. Intresting.

spanner

maybe this is a simplistic and navie thing to say but would of it been better and fairer if Israel warned the people the the southern strip along the border that they had 4 days to move out, and then moved in so far as to make the Katuska rockets out of range from Israel, and then fight Hisbolluah on the ground. hopefully an international force or the Lenbanonese army could take the region over.

granted this is no way the best solution but surely it is better than bombing the entire lebanons infrastructure, people who are completely unconnected to Hezbollah and not sending in ground troops in cowardly. They are not having any effect on Hezbollah which is meant to be their aim.

New_Departure06

Israel. The only country on earth seeking to incorporate conquests into its territory in the 21st century. The post WW2 apparatus of the UN was supposed to prevent imperialism like this. Israel is a rogue state and should be diplomatically, academically, and economically isolated.

It's kinda funny if you say Sheba Farms belong to Lebanon, why did Syria conveniently forget to inform the UN that Sheba Farms belongs to Lebanon.

Another load of crock to try and justify Hezbollah's attacks on Israel.

Syria regards the Sheeba Farms as Lebanese territory and therefore effectively has ceded it to them.

Do you think you could give the old Nazi/Israel analogies a decent burial now. It's kind of making my breakfast repeat on me a bit...

The truth hurts.

Slainte70

New_Departure06 wrote:

Syria regards the Sheba Farms as Lebanese territory and therefore effectively has ceded it to them.

Oh really, so why didn't they inform this to the UN when drawing up the blue line back in 2000?

Syria has unofficially said it is Lebanese (contrary to every historical piece of evidence), but they haven't "officially" informed the UN that it is Lebanese, because they do not want Israel to hand it back and cut a separate deal with Lebanon. Their view is no peace with Lebanon until peace with Syria. They have to unofficially say it is Lebanese to keep Hezbollah going.

Israel didn't have Sheba farms from 1949-1967, no peace with Lebanon, and surprisingly Lebanon didn't press the claim with Syria then. It is a non issue. Sheba Farms is a tactic, not an issue.

Ping Chow Chi

Manic Moran wrote:

Just who are Israel going to use nukes on when fighting Hezbullah? "Stop lobbing rockets at us, and using suicide bombers, or we'll nuke Southern Lebanon"? I don't see that happening.

NTM

hummm - but they are destorying most of southern Lebanon at the moment, I am pretty sure that if someone posed a serious threat to Isreal that they would indeed nuke the country that they came from.

I see the UN are saying that the IDF have killed around 600 people, most of them civ's one third of them children. Apparently even the majority of the Lebanese Christians are now coming down on the side of Hezbullah.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5228224.stm

apparently arround 50 died in this attack, many of them children, but as it is sounthern Lebanon, they will all be classified as terrorist by Isreal. ( I suppose that is one way they can keep their civ/terrorist ratio up )

cik

Ping Chow Chi wrote:

hummm - but they are destorying most of southern Lebanon at the moment, I am pretty sure that if someone posed a serious threat to Isreal that they would indeed nuke the country that they came from.

So, yes, the nuclear deterant is largely redundant if you are only suffering a hundred or so rockets a day.
There is plenty more scope for the ante to raised by Hezbollah before Israel decides to give it everything they got (ie what Hezbollah are doing) because they are facing immediate total destruction (incidently Hezbollahs goal)

Ping Chow Chi wrote:

I see the UN are saying that the IDF have killed around 600 people, most of them civ's one third of them children. Apparently even the majority of the Lebanese Christians are now coming down on the side of Hezbullah.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5228224.stm

apparently arround 50 died in this attack, many of them children, but as it is sounthern Lebanon, they will all be classified as terrorist by Isreal. ( I suppose that is one way they can keep their civ/terrorist ratio up )

Yes I think that marks the beginning of the end, Israel may realise that they have had their 2 weeks to defeat Hezbollah and they wont be able to do much more because the pressure is too great to continue. They had their chance and they wont be able to try weaken Hezbollah any further.

I had a fascinating conversation yesterday with someone who realised that if you focus on Israel and hold Israel to a higher standard than Hezbollah by overlooking or somewhat tolerating Hezbollahs human shields and indiscriminate rocket targeting that you are running into serious danger of taking a racist approach i.e. you cant reasonably except THEM to be as restraint or reasonable as Israel...why not?
They are in government and are seemingly much more than just a military force - why not demand the same standards and not tolerate human shields and indiscrimate targeting of civilians?
Is it
A, well... they arent capable of causing too much damage relative to Israel so Israel level have to operate at the same volume is response?
and/or
B, well... you cant expect THEM to act in a relatively civilised manner?

it can be a subtle and unconscious thing...can you actually demand Israel to be more reasonable because Hezbollah are acting so unreasonable without being a rascist/xenophobe?

Now, Im not, by any means, saying anyone who criticises Israel is rascist - it is imperative to criticise them when they kill 60 innocent people.
Im talking about some motivations for opinions that are not so obvious and maybe automatic and that is not the same as saying the overall opinions themselves are wrong.

tallus

So you're saying it's ok for Israel to bomb the ****e out of lebanon because Hezbollah are using people as human sheilds. Israeli soldiers have done that too.
http://www.btselem.org/english/Human_Shields/20060720_Human_Shields_in_Beit_Hanun.asp
They have killed a lot more than 60 people so far. As far as I'm concerned they lost any moral high ground they had when they started deliberately targetting civilians, red cross ambulances and civilian infrastructure.
It clearly isn't doing anything but giving Hezbollah a great recruitment tool.
I think it's a given that Hezbollah have a total disregard for all human life, but I expected to see a more measured responce from a so called civilsed country.

mike65

Hezbollahs number 2 speaks to Sunday Times

Hala Jaber, Beirut

Until now Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed militant group, has refused to reveal much about its response to Israel’s assault. But in an exclusive interview with The Sunday Times yesterday, Sheikh Naim Qassem, Hezbollah’s second in command, spoke out — and attacked Britain for allowing US planes carrying bombs to Israel to transit through a British airport.

“The transportation of American weapons to Israel is a blatant scandal of America’s full involvement in the battle,” he said, “and flying them over London bears large responsibility over Britain.

“Instead of working on solving the continuous conflicts in the Middle East, the powerful nations are participating in intensifying and complicating the issues. This is dangerous for peace, and for future relationships between this region and these countries.”

Qassem, a founding member of Hezbollah in 1992 and deputy general secretary, claimed Sheikh Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, Hezbollah’s leader, has remained in Lebanon and has not taken refuge outside the country as has been rumoured.

“The Israelis have said several times that they were targeting the general secretary and some of his leadership in bunkers because they are certain that they are indeed in Lebanon. Hezbollah’s leadership is used to being in the field.”

Qassem admitted Hezbollah had been preparing for conflict since Israel withdrew from south Lebanon in 2000. He claimed it had not been convinced that Israel’s aspirations in Lebanon were over, despite its withdrawal.

“The fact that Israel kept the Shebaa Farms (a strip of disputed land on the border), held on to the prisoners and its continuous reconnaissance flights over Lebanon were all indications of its aggressive intentions towards Lebanon,” he said.

Hezbollah’s stockpiling of arms and preparation of numerous bunkers and tunnels over the past six years have been key to its resistance. “If it was not for these preparations Lebanon would have been defeated within hours,” he said.

Hezbollah is believed to be in possession of four types of advanced missile: Fajr missiles with a range of 100 kilometres; Iran 130 missiles with a range of 110km; and Shahin missiles and 355mm rockets with ranges of 150km. He said that Hezbollah will use its weapons to strike deep into Israel should the attacks in Lebanon continue.

“Had (Nasrallah) wanted to name the rockets and cities that can be targeted he would have mentioned those in his statements.

“For now we shall refrain from giving details and let Israel deduce what it wants from this,” he said.

Qassem refused to reveal Hezbollah’s position on issues such as the deployment of international forces across south Lebanon before an unconditional cessation of Israeli aggression against Lebanon and the return of displaced people to their villages and towns.

“There is no other solution now but for an unconditional ceasefire after which all other political issues will be discussed in and through the right channels,” Qassem said.

Hezbollah leaders have agreed to join a Lebanese government peace proposal.

Hezbollah clearly likes to belive it is Lebanon and Lebanon is it.

Mike.

Sgt. Sensible

A high-ranking IAF officer caused a storm on Monday in an off-record briefing during which he told reporters that IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Dan Halutz had ordered the military to destroy 10 buildings in Beirut in retaliation to every Katyusha rocket strike on Haifa.

The officer said that the equation was created by Halutz and that every rocket strike on Haifa would be answered by IAF missile strikes on 10 12-story buildings in the Beirut neighborhood of Dahiya, a Hizbullah stronghold. Since the beginning of Operation Change of Direction, launched on July 12 following the abduction of two soldiers during a Hizbullah cross-border attack, over 80 buildings in the neighborhood have been destroyed.

Jerusalem Post.

What was that again about trying to avoid civilian casualties? And it not being a war against Lebanon?

gandalf

Ah another atrocity and the apologists are out in force again.

The IDF and Isreali government have shown the are now enforcing an active policy of genocide within their self declared buffer zone of South Lebanon. Can't wait for the excuse that some of the 30+ children that were murdered could have grown up to be terrorists.

fly_agaric

New_Departure06 wrote:

The truth hurts.

LOL. It is not the truth. It's an overblown and somewhat revolting (you know why) comparison used for shock-value.
If anything, they (the Israeli state) are basically old-style colonialists IMO - not genocidal maniacs bent on ruling the world.

cik wrote:

can you actually demand Israel to be more reasonable because Hezbollah are acting so unreasonable without being a rascist/xenophobe?

So the Israeli's are furthering the cause of political correctness by generally responding with massive force when attacked either by their neighbours or their colonial subjects? They are treating them as equals. Very good!

It doesn't square very well with the image of an outpost of democracy/civilisation/"the West" fighting "Islamic terror"/totalitarianism in a nasty, brutish part of the world where you have to be very vicious (don't display any weakness) to survive though does it?

Ping Chow Chi

cik wrote:

I had a fascinating conversation yesterday with someone who realised that if you focus on Israel and hold Israel to a higher standard than Hezbollah by overlooking or somewhat tolerating Hezbollahs human shields and indiscriminate rocket targeting that you are running into serious danger of taking a racist approach

I expect an army to hold higher standards than terrorist regardless of their race, but hey thats just me. You seem to be saying that you consider the IDF to also be terrorist, or at least operating at the same moral standard as terrorists, thats your call. If they are terrorist, then I would want the US to stop bankrolling them to the tune of billions per year.

Also you do realise that the civ to enemy ratio is much, much worse for the IDF than Hezbollah, so you could make a case that the terrorist actually operate at a higher standard?

Its always the case that anyone who says anything bad about Isreal is sooner or later called a racist, guess its just the easy way to dismiss anything that is said that you do not agree about. There is an easier option though, and please feel free to add me to your ignore list rather than imply I may be racist.

philologos

gandalf wrote:

The IDF and Isreali government have shown the are now enforcing an active policy of genocide within their self declared buffer zone of South Lebanon. Can't wait for the excuse that some of the 30+ children that were murdered could have grown up to be terrorists.

37 children so far.... some of them had disabilities...
This just shows that Israel has terrible intelligence. If any of you were watching Sky News this morning, there was a man broadcasting from Beirut and during it he was questioning an Israeli Military Advisor, the presenter asked "How could you get your intelligence so bad that you could target a building with handicapped children inside". He couldn't even give a straight answer, which leads me to question even more the motives of this offensive.

Before I say this, I don't condone anything that Hezbollah does. However it seems that Hezbollahs intelligence is better than that of the Israelis. Seeing that they have killed 54 people so far in north Israel and 15 of them happen to be civilians (as of last figures I saw).

gandalf

Jakkass wrote:

37 children so far.... some of them had disabilities...
This just shows that Israel has terrible intelligence. If any of you were watching Sky News this morning, there was a man broadcasting from Beirut and during it he was questioning an Israeli Military Advisor, the presenter asked "How could you get your intelligence so bad that you could target a building with handicapped children inside". He couldn't even give a straight answer, which leads me to question even more the motives of this offensive.

Yeah those spokespeople must feel like comical Ali at the moment except we aren't getting any laughs from them. I have been on a couple of yank websites and unbelieveably they are still right behind the Isreali's and this genocide.

Before I say this, I don't condone anything that Hezbollah does. However it seems that Hezbollahs intelligence is better than that of the Israelis. Seeing that they have killed 54 people so far in north Israel and 15 of them happen to be civilians (as of last figures I saw).

No I think the reason that Hezbollah has not killed more is because the rockets are so inaccurate and the Northern Isreali's have decent bomb shelters. Its not for lack of trying from their side as well and they will have to be dealt with, diplomatically.

Dirk Gently

Jakkass wrote:

37 children so far.... some of them had disabilities...
This just shows that Israel has terrible intelligence.

Call me a cynic but I don't believe it was a military intelligence failure. I reckon Israel has one of the best intelligence services in the world, if not the best. It’s not like they’re relying on third hand information from some other source on a location on the opposite side of the planet. I think it is a deliberate policy on the part of the IDF that they target what they see as military targets regardless of whether or not their intelligence shows that there are civilians in the area too. I think they see it as justified to hit back regardless of how many innocent Lebanese die in the resulting attack.

The IDF have to make a choice, are they at war with Hezbollah or is their objective to terrorise Lebanese civilians. If they’re at war with Hezbollah they would engage them on the ground in close combat instead of retreating every time they come up against the Hezbollah resistance, calling in indiscriminate air strikes instead of fighting what’s in front of them on the ground. If it is their intention to terrorise the Lebanese and Palestinian civilians then they are indeed achieving their objectives. It appears the IDF haven’t got the stomach to seek out and destroy the Hezbollah when it puts themselves at risk but have no problem doing it when it puts innocent civilians at risk. That is the tactic of a coward and a terrorist.