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

indiewindy

Apparently they are going to continue murdering civilians for another 10 to 14 days in Lebanon while the also kill more Palestinians in Gaza without them even making the news.
Does any channel in America show news that is not blatantly pro Israel?

darkman2

48hr ceasation of airstrikes called:)

Diogenes

clown bag wrote:

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.

Actually I think it is a intelligence failure. Israeli clearly didn't expect Hezballah to have such solid resistance and infrastructure. Thats according to most reports coming from the area. It's why the US gave them a week to sort this out, because Israeli were convinced this would be over in a week or so. No one expected this level of resistance.

This can be supported by reports in today's observer. Hezaballah recruits are generally made up of men from the family or tribe of people already in Hezabllah, that way loyality is assured. It's difficult to inflitrate Hezaballah and I think Israeli intelligence woefully underestimated the level of resistance.

The above should not infer that I support Israeli tactics, nor do I not believe that Israeli has a degree of "flexbility" in it's selection of targets that it considers to be of military importance, borders on the whimiscial, if it wasn't so tragic. I'm reminded of the link Posted earlier in the week of the family hit with an anti tank missile because simply they were driving a minivan which could possibly have been carrying Hezbollah rockets.

When you reach the point that you're attacking civilian cars because they "on the off chance" may contain military ordinance, you are commiting war crimes.

Dirk Gently

Diogenes wrote:

Actually I think it is a intelligence failure. Israeli clearly didn't expect Hezballah to have such solid resistance and infrastructure. Thats according to most reports coming from the area. It's why the US gave them a week to sort this out, because Israeli were convinced this would be over in a week or so. No one expected this level of resistance.

The original window of 10 days to 2 weeks was optimistic to say the least and does suggest an intelligence failure on the part of the Americans and the Israelis as America went about dragging its heels and frustrating diplomacy for what they hoped would be a 2 week period until it was all over.

What I was referring to as not been an intelligence failure was the incidents where there have been large civilian casualties as a result of air strikes and shelling. I feel that if the intelligence is good enough to pin point the locations targeted then it must also be good enough to know who populates the target area when they drop their bombs. I think they ignore the civilian presence indicated in their intelligence reports and strike the locations from the air anyway because they don't want to risk sending in a force on foot which would be capable of taking the rockets out and avoiding unneccessary deaths in the civilian Lebanese population.

redspider

indiewindy wrote:

Apparently they are going to continue murdering civilians for another 10 to 14 days.
Does any channel in America show news that is not blatantly pro Israel?

To your first point, I was also shocked today when I heard it reported that Olmert said this. It is absolutely crazy and a sign of the level of depravity that this Israeli government are currently at. Willing to continue to kill people at the rate they are doing is a clear sign of barbarism, state terrorism in operation.

In terms of the 2nd point, I was heartened to see that the US CBS channel tonight (Sky relay it at 0:30) showed the bombing in Qana today more graphically than anything they have shown to date in this conflict. They also didnt even attempt to 'balance it up' with showing any killings/rocket damage in Israeli. Perhaps they are taking a cue from the US President who is calling for some sort of cessation (at last), although his words are couched carefully. Not that very many people in the US watch their news on the 'old channels', such as CBS, Fox is more influential I understand as are the press, but its a start at changing attitudes in the US perhaps, both in the public and large and the body politic(k).

I'm hoping for a ceasefire and the start of 'negotiations', with some sort of international force in the buffer zone, etc, and a continuing peace process that can attempt to resolve differences in a balanced way, on all of Israel's borders - not an easy task I know.

By the way, also good to hear today that 1,000 or so protested here in Ireland (was it on Sat?) against the killings that are going on. That's better nmbers. Mind you, I think the Irish government have been personally as outraged as the Irish public, and Bertie has voiced his concerns, as did Dermot Ahern.

I dont think Olmert will get his way of 10-14 days of death, but lets see. Its over to the UN Security Council (UN SC) now, and it looks like the tide has turned in the US. I didnt hear any official British government responses today, or from Blair, so his next move is also an influential one (well, at least for a dog - time to start barking Tony and let your master know!).

redspider

Scofflaw

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.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.

One can say - a plague on both their houses! Both sides use civilians, both sides commit atrocities. They both see themselves as engaged in a war of survival where the only outcomes are death or victory - both sides, given the option, would literally exterminate the opposition. It's a bloody fight between barbarians, with neither side really "better".

However, one side gets a very large annual subsidy from the US, and has a preferential trade deal with the EU - and that's the side we expect to be more reasonable and restrained, because we're paying for their weapons. The other we would also expect to behave better if we start funding a reconstruction of Lebanon from which Hezbollah benefits - when we are paying the piper, we expect to call the tune.

cordially,
Scofflaw

juliuspret

Scofflaw wrote:

One can say - a plague on both their houses! Both sides use civilians, both sides commit atrocities. They both see themselves as engaged in a war of survival where the only outcomes are death or victory - both sides, given the option, would literally exterminate the opposition. It's a bloody fight between barbarians, with neither side really "better".

However, one side gets a very large annual subsidy from the US, and has a preferential trade deal with the EU - and that's the side we expect to be more reasonable and restrained, because we're paying for their weapons. The other we would also expect to behave better if we start funding a reconstruction of Lebanon from which Hezbollah benefits - when we are paying the piper, we expect to call the tune.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Am I the only one more than a little shocked to see that Israels economy is actually SMALLER than Irelands:
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2001rank.html

With their close relations to the US(far far closer than Ireland ever have had) I would have thought they would have had a far stronger economy.

cik

Ping Chow Chi wrote:

I expect an army to hold higher standards than terrorist regardless of their race, but hey thats just me.

well guess what, that was my point too, that is why the 'terrorists' should be the ones under pressure to ceasefire...

Ping Chow Chi wrote:

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?

I suppose you could try...

Ping Chow Chi wrote:

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.

Maybe you should cler the red mist and read my post again - I didnt say that your opinion has to be wrong!

Sgt. Sensible

cik wrote:

well guess what, that was my point too, that is why the 'terrorists' should be the ones under pressure to ceasefire...

Instead of using the word 'terrorist', can you just say Hezbollah or the IDF so we know who you mean? Some of us have conflicting ideas about who the real terrorists are here. Thx.

New_Departure06

It seems Israel is already violating its 48-hr 'ceasefire'. http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-07-30-mideast-violence_x.htm

JERUSALEM (AP) — The Israeli air force carried out strikes Monday in southern Lebanon despite an agreement to halt raids for 48 hours after nearly 60 Lebanese civilians were killed in an Israeli bombing, the army said.
The airstrikes near the village of Taibe were meant to protect ground forces operating in the area and were not targeting anyone or anything specific, the army said.

Meanwhile, Hezbollah guerrillas attacked an Israeli tank in southern Lebanon, wounding three soldiers, the military said. The attack occurred near the villages of Kila and Taibe on border, where Israeli ground forces have been fighting Hezbollah guerrillas for nearly two weeks.

Israel Radio also reported that Hezbollah rockets hit the northern town of Kiryat Shemona. No casualties were reported in the rocket attacks, the radio said.

Doesn't bode well for an end to the slaughter.

cik

FYI wrote:

If you are still wondering why you have noticed an influx of pro-Israeli posters, this could be your answer:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,174-2289232,00.html

"In the past week nearly 5,000 members of the World Union of Jewish Students (WUJS) have downloaded special “megaphone” software that alerts them to anti-Israeli chatrooms or internet polls to enable them to post contrary viewpoints. A student team in Jerusalem combs the web in a host of different languages to flag the sites so that those who have signed up can influence an opinion survey or the course of a debate."

hilarious, this is the broadest ad hominem I've ever seen.

I wonder if someone reading this thread learns a relevant fact that isnt being widely reported in the media* but is posted here by some sinister new poster is it a good thing or a bad thing?
is it spin, misdirection or education?

*for example while the first terrible tradegy at Qana is being referenced after this more recent terrible tradegy little is being said of the UN report into it that said -
on April 18, 1996, Hezbollah, fired two Katyusha rockets and eight mortars at Israeli soldiers near the so-called Red Line (the northern limits of the "security zone") from areas about 200 meters southwest and 350 meters southeast of the United Nations compound. 15 minutes later an Israeli unit responded by shelling the area with M-109A2 155 mm guns.
106 out of the more than 800 people inside died.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_shelling_of_Qana

do you welcome that context or is it offensive to your sensibilities?

passive

Right... And from the very same article

"Army Deputy Chief of Staff, Matan Vilnai stated that the shells hit the base not because they were off target, but because Israeli gunners used outdated maps of the area. He also stated that the gunners miscalculated the firing range of the shells.

"The U.N. appointed military advisor Major-General Franklin van Kappen of the Netherlands to investigate the incident.

(a) The distribution of impacts at Qana shows two distinct concentrations, whose mean points of impact are about 140 metres apart. If the guns were converged, as stated by the Israeli forces, there should have been only one main point of impact.

(b) The pattern of impacts is inconsistent with a normal overshooting of the declared target (the mortar site) by a few rounds, as suggested by the Israeli forces.

(c) During the shelling, there was a perceptible shift in the weight of fire from the mortar site to the United Nations compound.

(d) The distribution of point impact detonations and air bursts makes it improbable that impact fuses and proximity fuses were employed in random order, as stated by the Israeli forces.

(e) There were no impacts in the second target area which the Israeli forces claim to have shelled.

(f) Contrary to repeated denials, two Israeli helicopters and a remotely piloted vehicle were present in the Qana area at the time of the shelling.

While the possibility cannot be ruled out completely, it is unlikely that the shelling of the United Nations compound was the result of gross technical and/or procedural errors.[16]"

And also,

Amnesty International conducted an on-site investigation of the incident in collaboration with military experts, using interviews with UNIFIL staff and civilians in the compound, and posing questions to the IDF, who did not reply. Amnesty concluded, "the IDF intentionally attacked the UN compound, although the motives for doing so remain unclear. The IDF have failed to substantiate their claim that the attack was a mistake. Even if they were to do so they would still bear responsibility for killing so many civilians by taking the risk to launch an attack so close to the UN compound."[17]

Human Rights Watch concurred, "The decision of those who planned the attack to choose a mix of high-explosive artillery shells that included deadly anti-personnel shells designed to maximize injuries on the ground -- and the sustained firing of such shells, without warning, in close proximity to a large concentration of civilians -- violated a key principle of international humanitarian law."[18]

cik

and indeed...

Prime Minister Shimon Peres claimed that "We did not know that several hundred people were concentrated in that camp. It came to us as a bitter surprise."[11] Following the attack, Lt.-Gen. Amnon Shahak, Israel's chief of staff, at a press conference in Tel Aviv on April 18 defended the shelling: "I don't see any mistake in judgment… We fought Hezbollah there [in Qana], and when they fire on us, we will fire at them to defend ourselves… I don't know any other rules of the game, either for the army or for civilians..."[12]. Both the U.S. and Israel accused Hezbollah of "shielding", the use of civilians as a cover for military activities, which is a breach of the laws of war. The U.S. State Department spokesperson, Nicolas Burns stated, "Hezbollah [is] using civilians as cover. That's a despicable thing to do, an evil thing."[13] and Prime Minister Shimon Peres cited the use of human shielding to blame Hezbollah. On April 18 he said, "They used them as a shield, they used the UN as a shield — the UN admitted it."[14] Rabbi Yehuda Amital, a member of Peres' cabinet, called the Qana killings a desecration of God's name (chilul hashem).[15]

I welcome the context, dont you?

Morlar

cik wrote:

and indeed...

Prime Minister Shimon Peres claimed that "We did not know that several hundred people were concentrated in that camp. It came to us as a bitter surprise."[11] Following the attack, Lt.-Gen. Amnon Shahak, Israel's chief of staff, at a press conference in Tel Aviv on April 18 defended the shelling: "I don't see any mistake in judgment… We fought Hezbollah there [in Qana], and when they fire on us, we will fire at them to defend ourselves… I don't know any other rules of the game, either for the army or for civilians..."[12]. Both the U.S. and Israel accused Hezbollah of "shielding", the use of civilians as a cover for military activities, which is a breach of the laws of war. The U.S. State Department spokesperson, Nicolas Burns stated, "Hezbollah [is] using civilians as cover. That's a despicable thing to do, an evil thing."[13] and Prime Minister Shimon Peres cited the use of human shielding to blame Hezbollah. On April 18 he said, "They used them as a shield, they used the UN as a shield — the UN admitted it."[14] Rabbi Yehuda Amital, a member of Peres' cabinet, called the Qana killings a desecration of God's name (chilul hashem).[15]

I welcome the context, dont you?

I think what you have posted there just re-inforces that the IDF and israeli politicians are absolute and total scumbags who will go to any length to justify murdering hundreds of civilians. How they sleep at night or can even keep a straight face is beyond me.

Also highlights that this (most recent qana bombing of civilians by idf) is not the first time israel has done this. Each time there are excuses galore and apologists crawl out from under their rocks - and then it gets forgotten about till it happens again.

I am staggered that any israeli person could think that bombing large numbers of civilians /refugees from the air (600+ so far) will some how gain you allies and not lifelong enemies. This illustrates that israel is its own worst enemy.

The longer this goes on the more inclined I have become to view hisbollah not as terrorist organisation (at least not in comparison to the IDF) but as a legitimate resistance to a warmongering neighbouring country.

gandalf

Some posts moved from the "Protests against Isreal" thread as they are more appropriate here.

LostinBlanch

cik wrote:

Prime Minister Shimon Peres claimed that "We did not know that several hundred people were concentrated in that camp. It came to us as a bitter surprise."

From my recollection at the time, the Israelis were denying they had anything to do with it until pictures showing an Israeli unmanned drone directing the shelling found their way into journalists hands (Robert Fisks I think).

bonkey

cik wrote:

hilarious, this is the broadest ad hominem I've ever seen.

Its a bit difficult to have a broad ad hominem attack. Either its personal, or its broad in scope.

You can't have broad personal attacks (unless maybe you're asserting that someone is very, very fat, which this article clearly isn't)

I assume your position is that its just coincidence that you and an unusually large number of others getting involved in Israeli discussions have low-post-counts, July-2006 sign-up dates and a firm pro-Israeli stance?

I wonder if someone reading this thread learns a relevant fact that isnt being widely reported in the media* but is posted here by some sinister new poster is it a good thing or a bad thing?
is it spin, misdirection or education?

Its an unsupported allegation until such times as corroborating or refuting evidence can be supplied by someone.

You'll find people who will believe unsupported evidence on all sides of a discussion. No ideology has a monopoly on such irrationality.

Benedict XVI

I heard an Israeli journalist on Morning ireland this morning.
he made a very good point - that being that Hezbollah have constantly attacked civilian targets in Israel and there is hardly a word about it.

Israel does not what to kill inncoent civilians but when Hezbollah attack Israel that's all they want to do.
Also a guy from Hezbollah was on the Last Word this eveing, when pressed about whether Hezbollah was to see the end to the Israeli state he would not answer, said it was a question for another day, typical Arab answer, aviod the important questions.

joeirish

Benedict XVI wrote:

I heard an Israeli journalist on Morning ireland this morning.
he made a very good point - that being that Hezbollah have constantly attacked civilian targets in Israel and there is hardly a word about it.

Israel does not what to kill inncoent civilians but when Hezbollah attack Israel that's all they want to do.
Also a guy from Hezbollah was on the Last Word this eveing, when pressed about whether Hezbollah was to see the end to the Israeli state he would not answer, said it was a question for another day, typical Arab answer, aviod the important questions.

I think you will find that Israel has deliberately attacked civilians even when Hizbullah were not attacking Israeli civilians - as in the massacre in Qana yesterday. In any case I would expect higher standards from a nation than from a bunch of terrorists. When a nation starts behaving like a terrorist group then it will have no moral ground to stand on.
Remember what happenend in Northern Ireland and with the IRA. What would you say if every time the IRA had bombed an English pub or other target the British airforce dropped a load of bombs on NI?
In the end it took dialogue to get a fairly stable peace and end to the violence and even with provocation from extremists and terrorists those who wanted peace continued talking in NI. I don't believe that Israel wants peace. I do believe that the US and UK arms makers will show a handsome profit as all of the Israeli bombs will need to be replaced.

bonkey

Benedict XVI wrote:

I heard an Israeli journalist on Morning ireland this morning.
he made a very good point - that being that Hezbollah have constantly attacked civilian targets in Israel and there is hardly a word about it.

So you believe that the missiles possessed by Hezbollah have accurate guidance systems then?

Israel does not what to kill inncoent civilians but when Hezbollah attack Israel that's all they want to do.

Israel have unquestionably the more accurate systems, and have caused roughly 10x more civilian deaths.

How, from this, you conclude that Hezbollah don't care about civilian deaths while Israel does is beyond me.

Neither side has shown notable care for civilians. Given their respective abilities, though, only one side has a realistic ability to do so independantly of a cease-fire...and its the one with the greater head-count to date.

typical Arab answer, aviod the important questions.

It always amazes me how quick Israeli supporters are to throw claims of anti-Semitism at anyone who criticises any action of Israel, whilst at teh same time so many of them are perfectly content to tar all Arabs with the same brush in a manner that you've just illustrated so well.

So, if I understand this....

Criticising a specific action by the Israeli military/government == you hate all Jews.
Making negative generalisations about Arabs == perfectly reasonable criticism.

Care to address this, or is it perhaps a question best left for another day?

Morlar

Benedict XVI wrote:

I heard an Israeli journalist on Morning ireland this morning.
he made a very good point -

Just out of curiosity did you see the 6 o'clock news report from Julian manion ?

He reported from a couple of lebaneese towns where entire districts/neighbourhoods were reduced to rubble. It looked like a scene from hiroshima or 9/11 - there were entire blocks where they had been flattened, not just one or two select buildings it looked like whole towns had been comprehensively carpet bombed.

He also pointed out that israel had been targetting petrol stations and every and any kind of structure (not to mention fleeing civilians, red cross ambulances and un positions).

You might be interested to know that he also interviewed a hisbollah terrorist (acc israel) a blind man who doesnt own a car who is hunkered in one of the remaining building's basements with his wife and children who are also unable to leave.

Having viewed that I can say that in my opinion any talk from israel claiming they are only attacking military targets is nonsense - total fiction.

By the way - you mentioned that israel have said that they only want to hit military targets - hisbollah have made similair claims - saying that they only attacked haifa to shut down israels main port and exert some economic pressure on the country that is bombing their own country to pieces. To look at both sides claims and the end results of either side's campaign - its hard to tell who is being more honest on that one dont you think ?

Benedict XVI

bonkey wrote:

So you believe that the missiles possessed by Hezbollah have accurate guidance systems then?



Israel have unquestionably the more accurate systems, and have caused roughly 10x more civilian deaths.

How, from this, you conclude that Hezbollah don't care about civilian deaths while Israel does is beyond me.

Neither side has shown notable care for civilians. Given their respective abilities, though, only one side has a realistic ability to do so independantly of a cease-fire...and its the one with the greater head-count to date.


It always amazes me how quick Israeli supporters are to throw claims of anti-Semitism at anyone who criticises any action of Israel, whilst at teh same time so many of them are perfectly content to tar all Arabs with the same brush in a manner that you've just illustrated so well.

So, if I understand this....

Criticising a specific action by the Israeli military/government == you hate all Jews.
Making negative generalisations about Arabs == perfectly reasonable criticism.

Care to address this, or is it perhaps a question best left for another day?

I never mentioned anti-Semitism
All people who criticise Israel are not anti-Semitic

My point is I have yet to hear an Arab spokesperson answer a question about the existance of Israel, or the Iranian leaders statment that it should be wiped off the map, without a 'this is not the time to discuss this' type answer.
I'll try and find audio of the Last Word interview.
What I did say was that I have yet to

FYI

Some bits and pieces to get the ball rolling:

The idea that Hizbullah use Lebanese civilians as human shields is not entirely convincing. Firstly, Hizbullah's existence relies heavily on the support of the Lebanese people. Secondly, in all the bombings by Israel that have resulted in civilian casualties, and therefore elicited an excuse, there have been few if any Hizbullah fighters among the dead.

Jonathan Cook noted recently that "Hizbullah's rockets have been targeted overwhelming at strategic locations: the northern economic hub of Haifa, its satellite towns and the array of military sites across the Galilee.

"....It is obvious to everyone in Nazareth, for example, that the rockets landing close by, and once on, the city over the past week are searching out, and some have fallen extremely close to, the weapons factory sited near us.

Hizbullah seems to have as little concern for the collateral damage of civilian deaths as Israel -- each wants the balance of terror in its favour -- but it is nonsense to suggest that Hizbullah's goals are any more ignoble than Israel's."

Tom Clonan's article in today's Irish Times:

"The type of missiles being fired by Hizbullah at Israeli cities cannot be fired from within houses, mosques, hospitals or even UN facilities as has been suggested by the IDF. Due to the massive "back-blast" caused by the rocket launchers of these missiles, they can only be fired from open ground. To fire them from within a building would result in the instant death of the missile crew and probable destruction of the missile before launch. Most of the missiles are truck-mounted and are fired - on open ground - from the backs of flat-bedded trucks or larger four-wheel-drive vehicles."

The Israeli Minister for Justice has himself rebutted the idea that the Hizbullah force non-combatants to act as human shields:

"Asked whether entire villages should be flattened, he [Israeli Justice Minister Haim Ramon]said:"These places are not villages. They are military bases in which Hezbollah people are hiding and from which they are operating."

"All those now in south Lebanon are terrorists who are related in some way to Hezbollah,"he said."

Former Labour government adviser, David Clark, wrote in the Guardian recently, "Israel's chief of staff, General Dan Halutz, promised to "turn back the clock in Lebanon by 20 years"

As in Lebanon, the intention is to force civilians to turn on the militias by inflicting as much pain and suffering as the Israeli government thinks it can get away with."

The man who wrote the IDF code of ethics, Professor Asa Kasher told The Jerusalem Post it may be "morally justified" to obliterate areas with high concentrations of terrorists, even if civilian casualties result.

Jonathon Cook:

"Several Israeli armaments factories and storage depots have been built close by Arab communities in the north of Israel, possibly in the hope that by locating them there Arab regimes will be deterred from attacking Israel's enormous armory. In other words, the inhabitants of several of Israel's Arab towns and villages have been turned into collective human shields – protection for Israel's war machine."

Human Rights Watch's statement:

"(The Qana attack) is the latest product of an indiscriminate bombing campaign that the Israel Defence Forces have waged in Lebanon."

gandalf

Moving this to the "Is Isreal right" thread. May rename the thread.

Scofflaw

juliuspret wrote:

Am I the only one more than a little shocked to see that Israels economy is actually SMALLER than Irelands:
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2001rank.html

With their close relations to the US(far far closer than Ireland ever have had) I would have thought they would have had a far stronger economy.

The benefits of Ireland not being militarised? Although military spending can be a way of pumping money into an economy (for example, the US military-industrial complex), that only really works in peacetime. If you're pumping money into the military, and the military is actually using it (blowing it up, firing it at other people), then it's money down the drain, and a way of distorting the economy away from things that make money.

cordially,
Scofflaw

cik

FYI wrote:

Some bits and pieces to get the ball rolling:

The idea that Hizbullah use Lebanese civilians as human shields is not entirely convincing.

Rather you arent convinced by the video tape and the numerous UN reports and criticsim regarding this widelt established Hezbollah practice

FYI wrote:

Secondly, in all the bombings by Israel that have resulted in civilian casualties, and therefore elicited an excuse, there have been few if any Hizbullah fighters among the dead.

What are you basing this on?
Of course kids arent Hezbollah fighters you can exclude them, but for the rest you can only honestly say there might not or probably not have been many Hezbollah fighters but I dont see were you are getting the assertive few if any idea.

Anyway, as for Bonkey saying you cant have a broad Ad Hominem attack I disagree - you can try to slur a vague group of people in order to detract from their opinion, when you do that rather than tackle what they say you make yourself look incapable of having an intelligent debate.

Anyway, Im off enjoy so watch out for those prejudices kids...

Hobbes

cik wrote:

Rather you arent convinced by the video tape and the numerous UN reports and criticsim regarding this widelt established Hezbollah practice

Indeed.. So why explain they bomb 3 dams? Hizbollah hiding there? How about the 3 airports? the Ports? Hizbollah hiding there?

Please explain how that the majority of infrastructure destroyed (where only civilians died) helped take out Hizbollah when those locations where not viable rocket launching locations (eg. Dams, Ports, Airports) but also that rocket launches from those locations wouldn't hit Israel.

Hizbollah hide in with civillians? Sure, there have been reports of that. There have also been reports of Hizbollah purposely avoiding civilians due to being ratted out.

However to imply that every target that Israel has hit had "human shields" in it is pure BS.

Hobbes

Benedict XVI wrote:

My point is I have yet to hear an Arab spokesperson answer a question about the existance of Israel, or the Iranian leaders statment that it should be wiped off the map, without a 'this is not the time to discuss this' type answer.
I'll try and find audio of the Last Word interview.
What I did say was that I have yet to

I'm pretty sure those people who have lost family and friends in the bombing if they didn't give the "wiped off the map" response before they probably will now.

How will getting that answer help stop more people dying?

cik

Hobbes wrote:

Hizbollah hide in with civillians? Sure, there have been reports of that.

Have you read the details of the UN reports of it?

Hobbes wrote:

There have also been reports of Hizbollah purposely avoiding civilians due to being ratted out.

That is of course possible but I havent heard such reports...who made them? I'd be very interested to read about them

Hobbes wrote:

However to imply that every target that Israel has hit had "human shields" in it is pure BS.

Of course it is, which is why I didnt imply anything like that so I have to ask you -
where are you getting this idea from? and
why did you introduce it?

monosharp

I always find it funny when people are always condemning "islamic" fundamentalism and yet have no real clue about it except what they've being told on BBC or Sky News. (even though this is not the issue in the first place!!)

There are Islamic fundamentalists, just like there are Christian Fundamentalists and [whatever you believe in] fundamentalists.

But a lot of people here supporting Israel against those "evil" Arab islamics etc should go to Israel and ask one of the Israeli's this simple question. "Who is going to hell, me (a christian) or Osama Bin Laden ?"

The answer you'd get is "both of you". You can say what you like about Christianity etc. You can make the point that "technically" we're supposed to believe the same thing (i.e > Everyone else of any other faith is going downstairs). But the thing about Israelis and to a lesser extent, Jews in general, is that the vast vast vast majority of them believe it absolutely, 100%. This isn't even necessarily a "religious" thing in that they might not be a devout jew but they still believe they are the "chosen" people and everyone else is [insert suitable name for cursed hellbound people]

I ended up working with a girl going out with a Jew (French) for years, they had a kid togeather (jewish) etc. One of our workmates commented to her saying "jesus thats lasting a long time considering". Eventually he basically said "I couldn't stay with someone who thought i was going to hell." She ended up asking her partner, who funnily enough hadn't made this clear to her before.

Basically she asked something like -> "Do you believe i'm going to hell and won't be with you and [insert kids name] ?"
Him "Absolutely."

I don't know how anyone can watch the news and stomach what Israel are doing and continue to do. Neither side is right but Israel is nothing but a bully with a big brother behind it. Israelis ARE extremely arrogant, and do (in the vast majority) believe they are superior to other people (Maybe someone should remind them that Hitler believed the same) because they are Gods "chosen" people.

Can you imagine what would happen if this was Iran, Syria etc that started attacking another country targetting "terrorists" ?

They would be leveled into the ground quicker then you could say "Dubyla".

Israel can do what they want, they can kill UN soldiers, they can kill as many Palestinians as they like, they can kill Egyptians, they can kill Lebanese. They can even kill Americans and nothing is done against them.

I agree with neither side but i can't say i'd be too sorry to see Israel get a bit of their own medicine, its probably the only thing thats going to get some sort of peace out there in the long term because as long as Israel think they can do what they like they will do what they like.

Maybe a [insert some country here] missile should hit Jerusaleum by a similiar "accident" that has plaqued the Israelis targetting all these years.

Of course then we'd probably see Uncle George and the world as a whole react completely differently and an "Opps sorry about that" wouldn't be accepted, as it has being and will be, from the Israelis.