Syria - where is the reaction?

So Syria likes to fund terrorist groups who use an independant sovereign country as a base from which to launch their terrorist attacks on Israeli civilians. Of course they know full well that, given Israel's penchant for overreaction and brute force, the only people who will suffer from the backlash are innocent Lebanese civilians. It's kinda like a win win situation for Syria. But in any event, just in case they think the Lebanese are getting uppity at any time, course they will just take out a political leader every now and again to let them know who's boss.

When the US play God in this manner with independant states, it goes to page after page here. Where is the outrage? Where is the disgust? Just because many posters might hate Israel, and so does Syria, do we tolerate this behaviour?

sovtek

Deleted User wrote:

So Syria likes to fund terrorist groups who use an independant sovereign country as a base from which to launch their terrorist attacks on Israeli civilians. Of course they know full well that, given Israel's penchant for overreaction and brute force, the only people who will suffer from the backlash are innocent Lebanese civilians. It's kinda like a win win situation for Syria. But in any event, just in case they think the Lebanese are getting uppity at any time, course they will just take out a political leader every now and again to let them know who's boss.

When the US play God in this manner with independant states, it goes to page after page here. Where is the outrage? Where is the disgust? Just because many posters might hate Israel, and so does Syria, do we tolerate this behaviour?

There is no evidence that Syria was behind the assassination of Rafiki or the latest Christian leader (forget his name). A UN investigation of the first assassination said as much and the people that are suspected are being tried for the same.
If you are referring to Hezbollah (or Hizbollah) as a terrorist group, they are actually part of the Lebanese government and a resistance group to a country that occupies their nation.
Even if Syria funds Hezbollah they are largely Lebanese and Syria have every right to support their resistance to a country that defies many UNSC Resolutions.

Gurgle

Deleted User wrote:

So Syria likes to fund terrorist groups who use an independant sovereign country as a base from which to launch their terrorist attacks on Israeli civilians.

Prove it.

Deleted User wrote:

When the US play God in this manner with independant states, it goes to page after page here.

The US plays God under the banner of 'Freedom and Democracy'. Its the hypocracy that generates the backlash.

sovtek

sovtek wrote:

There is no evidence that Syria was behind the assassination of Rafiki or the latest Christian leader (forget his name). A UN investigation of the first assassination said as much and the people that are suspected are being tried for the same.

True. I have also heard that Hamas have blown up their own and pinned it on the Israelis.

sovtek

Deleted User wrote:

True. I have also heard that Hamas have blown up their own and pinned it on the Israelis.

I heard that the Virgin Mary appeared in a tortilla in Mexico several years ago.

sovtek

sovtek wrote:

I heard that the Virgin Mary appeared in a tortilla in Mexico several years ago.

And announced that the Syrians would never harm a hair on a Lebanese head...

bonkey

Deleted User wrote:

So Syria likes to fund terrorist groups
...
When the US play God in this manner with independant states, it goes to page after page here. Where is the outrage? Where is the disgust?

Hold on there....

Could you mention the last thread which went to pages and pages about the US funding terrorist groups?

Hobbes

Funny how yesterdays friend is now our Enemy.

Conor did you know that after 9/11 Syria was actually committed to stopping terrorism and did so with the help of the US.

It only ended when the US was looking for support for the Iraq war and Syria disagreed.

Of course more recently the US (Rice) have praised Syria on trying to stop terrorist attacks. You might recall that whole attempted bombing of the US embassy stopped by Syria.

You also might forget the recent talks between Syria and Israel in an attempt to stop the fighting going on in Lebanon. Don't recall any terrorist attacks at that meeting.

Of that Assad since coming to power in 2000 has over and over asked for a dialog with Israel to help settle everything. Only Israel had been ignoring him till recently.

True. I have also heard that Hamas have blown up their own and pinned it on the Israelis.

Heard from who exactly? Wheres your source?

Frederico

Deleted User wrote:

So Syria likes to fund terrorist groups who use an independant sovereign country as a base from which to launch their terrorist attacks on Israeli civilians. Of course they know full well that, given Israel's penchant for overreaction and brute force, the only people who will suffer from the backlash are innocent Lebanese civilians. It's kinda like a win win situation for Syria. But in any event, just in case they think the Lebanese are getting uppity at any time, course they will just take out a political leader every now and again to let them know who's boss.

When the US play God in this manner with independant states, it goes to page after page here. Where is the outrage? Where is the disgust? Just because many posters might hate Israel, and so does Syria, do we tolerate this behaviour?

Its the hyprocrisy of it most people can't stand..

What makes you sicker?
That the Syrians would allow a man be tortured in their country?

Or that the US arrests a random muslim man based on the flimsiest evidence and sends him to be tortured for a year in Syria while preaching to us about freedom and democracy?

Anyway all you have to do is focus some light on the CIA and they makes the Syrians look like a bunch of treehuggers.

bonkey

bonkey wrote:

Could you mention the last thread which went to pages and pages about the US funding terrorist groups?

That's not what I said at all. I said that when the US play God in other countries, the reaction goes to page after page. Search here under 'US and Iraq' for a pretty good example.

Hobbes wrote:

Heard from who exactly? Wheres your source?

You haven't heard all that controversy about the Gaza beach attacks? One side saying it came from Israeli shells, the other from Hamas ordnance buried in the beach etc. etc.

One might validly say many signs point to Israeli responsibility, but then again one might equally say that many signs point to Syria as being up to their eyes in the execution of Lebanese politcians. One obviously cannot require a higher standard proof in those cases.

Frederico wrote:

What makes you sicker?

Neither. The point I am making is that when the blood is on Israeli/US hands, it seems to make many here sicker. In fact, I suspect the US has never received such a spirited defence here as Syria are getting...

sovtek

sovtek wrote:

There is no evidence that Syria was behind the assassination of Rafiki or the latest Christian leader (forget his name). A UN investigation of the first assassination said as much and the people that are suspected are being tried for the same.

Quite right. There is no evidence that Syria was behind the assassinations, however, it does strike a cord when its the anti-syrian group thats targeted. If anti-American politicians in a government were assassinated, most posters would automatically jump to the conclusion that it was financed or approved by the US.

If you are referring to Hezbollah (or Hizbollah) as a terrorist group, they are actually part of the Lebanese government and a resistance group to a country that occupies their nation.

They're a militia that has refused to disband despite the UN rulings covering their existance. They only gain some legitimacy because the Lebanese government said that they shouldn't be covered by the ruling. And Israel doesn't occupy Lebanon, with the exception of those areas covered by the UN's Blue line. I always find it interesting which parts of UN resolutions/rulings are conveniently relevent, and which can be ignored.

Even if Syria funds Hezbollah they are largely Lebanese and Syria have every right to support their resistance to a country that defies many UNSC Resolutions.

http://www.2la.org/english/eng-mainhelp_syria.htm#so03

Fairly good explanation of the Syrian invasion & occupation of Lebanon.

Its funny but people look to Israel all the time, but can't focus on the actions of the other countries in the region. Syria's own actions in Lebanon were as bad as israel at that time. There is nothing to suggest that Syria has lost its desire to pull Lebanon back into Syrian territory.

The IRA were mostly Irish, and yet I'd never have considered their motives to be similiar to the population of Ireland. These sort of groups operate on their own beliefs & motives, and the rest of the country factors very little in it. Hezbollah probably understands that if they're victorious most people will follow just to avoid trouble. If they fail, they can just continue what they're currently doing. No big loss either way....

bonkey

Deleted User wrote:

That's not what I said at all.

Are you suggesting that I misquoted you?

I said that when the US play God in other countries,

Thats not what you said. Interesting you accuse me of misunderstandnig/misrepresenting you, and yet you provide the less accurate quote.

You've left out the in this manner that I included. They're part of the same sentence, and are relevant to the meaning.

With those three words added, you're saying not only are both playing God, but they are doing so in the same way. For Syria, you defined what that way was - the funding of terrorists.

Now, if you're clarifying that this is not what you meant to say, thats fine by me....I can't be expected to know when someone meant to say something other than what they said.

I took exception to what you said. Apparently its not what you meant.

bonkey

Deleted User wrote:

You haven't heard all that controversy about the Gaza beach attacks? One side saying it came from Israeli shells, the other from Hamas ordnance buried in the beach etc. etc.

I heard it was the piratical followers of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

One obviously cannot require a higher standard proof in those cases.

So you agree that my hypothesis is as likely as yours, given that the evidence rules neither out, and you can't require a higher standard of proof?

Or maybe a higher standard of proof is exactly whats needed here.

In fact, I suspect the US has never received such a spirited defence here as Syria are getting...

Sure it hasn't. Those threads run to pages and pages and every single post is from people like you agreeing how scummy the US has been. YOu should be ashamed of yourself....attacking the US like that and then complaining that it doesn't get defended.

Hobbes

Deleted User wrote:

You haven't heard all that controversy about the Gaza beach attacks?

No, which is why I asked you to post your sources. You got a link where you got the story from?

Hobbes

Hobbes wrote:

No, which is why I asked you to post your sources. You got a link where you got the story from?

Overview here...

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

Hobbes

Deleted User wrote:

Overview here...

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

Which you haven't read.

I had a look at that page and there is absolutly no mention of Hamas attacking its own people. In fact the only link I can find that may suggest that has been removed from the news site it links to.

So I'll ask again, where is this story you have obviously read?

Zombrex

Deleted User wrote:

Where is the outrage? Where is the disgust? Just because many posters might hate Israel, and so does Syria, do we tolerate this behaviour?

Who is "we" and how do you define "tolerate"?

Frederico

Deleted User wrote:

When the US play God in this manner with independant states, it goes to page after page here. Where is the outrage? Where is the disgust? Just because many posters might hate Israel, and so does Syria, do we tolerate this behaviour?

"Just because many posters might hate Israel"

Almost sounds like hating for hating's sake with no reason at all. There are plenty of reasons for posters to be against Israel's actions and policies.

"Israel has dismissed an offer by Palestinian militant groups to stop firing rockets into Israel, if Israel ends attacks on Palestinians."

"Since June, Israeli troops have killed more than 400 Palestinians in Gaza, roughly half of them civilians. Three Israeli soldiers have died in operations and two civilians were killed by rocket fire."

Cluster bombs. White phosphorus. Occupation, state-terror, airstrikes, shelling civilians, cutting off water/electricity, oppression.

Constantly defying the UN. Shelling a UN position. Provoking and "Buzzing" the UN. The list is endless.

Sesshoumaru

Frederico wrote:

"Just because many posters might hate Israel"

Almost sounds like hating for hating's sake with no reason at all. There are plenty of reasons for posters to be against Israel's actions and policies.

"Israel has dismissed an offer by Palestinian militant groups to stop firing rockets into Israel, if Israel ends attacks on Palestinians."

oh wow what an offer! how could they refuse? Are the Israelis insane war mongers? All they have to do is stop ALL offensive actions against the terrorists and the terrorists will ONLY stop firing rockets. The usual ambushes and suicide bombing can continue.

Sesshoumaru

Frederico wrote:

"Since June, Israeli troops have killed more than 400 Palestinians in Gaza, roughly half of them civilians. Three Israeli soldiers have died in operations and two civilians were killed by rocket fire."

So that means they have killed around 200 terrorists as well. Way to go IDF! Probably most of the remaining 200 "civilians" were terrorists as well. Its not like they put on an army uniform before they go out to murder Jews.

sovtek

Sesshoumaru wrote:

So that means they have killed around 200 terrorists as well. Way to go IDF! Probably most of the remaining 200 "civilians" were terrorists as well. Its not like they put on an army uniform before they go out to murder Jews.

Those devious little Palestinians...ach ye sure they're all terrrorists...let just turn the whole place into a glass factory.

Sesshoumaru

Sesshoumaru wrote:

So that means they have killed around 200 terrorists as well. Way to go IDF! Probably most of the remaining 200 "civilians" were terrorists as well. Its not like they put on an army uniform before they go out to murder Jews.

Probably? Nope. Not really. Read Israeli reports of clashes with Palestinian forces. Many of their reports will make mention of casualties in the form of 3 militants and 2 civilians killed in an exchange of fire. Many of the deaths in that total above comes from larger incidents like the latest artillery "mistake" which killed 18 civilians. (Which I doubt was a mistake, despite my Israeli sympathies)

The other side of the coin though is the use of civilians while making attacks on Israeli patrols, or using their own people as human shields against israeli attacks, thus placing them in a position of harm.
(http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1162378457992&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull)

The "more than 400 deaths" listed above suggest that they were all killed directly by Israeli's without taking into account the presence of Paramilitary forces, firing on Israeli troops (Afterall, Palestinian forces being perfect shots, they'd never make a mistake and hit their own people).

Oh, and the uniform issue won't get you anywhere. It doesn't matter that Israeli forces wear uniforms which set them apart from civilians, and Palestinian forces don't. The only thing that matters is that civilians die, and that Israel is the cause of it all.

Jimboo_Jones

Sesshoumaru wrote:

oh wow what an offer! how could they refuse? Are the Israelis insane war mongers? All they have to do is stop ALL offensive actions against the terrorists and the terrorists will ONLY stop firing rockets. The usual ambushes and suicide bombing can continue.

Well, Israel keeps saying that the only reason that there are incursions into Gaza is to stop the rocket fire. Maybe Israel should call their bluff and say they would commit to a complete ceasefire.

Oh, and the uniform issue won't get you anywhere. It doesn't matter that Israeli forces wear uniforms which set them apart from civilians, and Palestinian forces don't.

I think thats the way its always been, when the IRA killed off-duty soldiers they where still classified as soldiers and indeed when Israel drops a one ton bomb on Palestinian militant as he sleeps, he is still a militant. And to be honest, I think its the only way that it could work.

nacho libre

Deleted User wrote:

Probably? Nope. Not really. Read Israeli reports of clashes with Palestinian forces. Many of their reports will make mention of casualties in the form of 3 militants and 2 civilians killed in an exchange of fire. Many of the deaths in that total above comes from larger incidents like the latest artillery "mistake" which killed 18 civilians. (Which I doubt was a mistake, despite my Israeli sympathies)

The other side of the coin though is the use of civilians while making attacks on Israeli patrols, or using their own people as human shields against israeli attacks, thus placing them in a position of harm.
(http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1162378457992&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull)

The "more than 400 deaths" listed above suggest that they were all killed directly by Israeli's without taking into account the presence of Paramilitary forces, firing on Israeli troops (Afterall, Palestinian forces being perfect shots, they'd never make a mistake and hit their own people).

Oh, and the uniform issue won't get you anywhere. It doesn't matter that Israeli forces wear uniforms which set them apart from civilians, and Palestinian forces don't. The only thing that matters is that civilians die, and that Israel is the cause of it all.

no... what matters is when civilians die due to deliberate targeting by Israeli forces. I agree with you not all civilians death are Israels fault but some are. Do you justify deliberate targeting? I suspect you deny it happens.

Frederico

Frederico wrote:

"Israel has dismissed an offer by Palestinian militant groups to stop firing rockets into Israel, if Israel ends attacks on Palestinians."

As Sesshoumaru mentions below, there's no mention of suspending attacks by other means on Israeli positions or forces. Until Palestinian forces commit to such a move, I doubt we'll see Israel withdrawing its forces. Afterall, every time they've withdrawn from an area, attacks have actually increased.

Cluster bombs. White phosphorus. Occupation, state-terror, airstrikes, shelling civilians, cutting off water/electricity, oppression.

Ahh, yes, all of which have been used in Palestine during the occupation.. well, except for the first two. I think you're combining Palestine with Lebanon again. Unless, you can show me where they've used Cluster bombs, and White Phosphorus in Palestine? I assume you want to keep the topic on just Palestinian issues?

Constantly defying the UN. Shelling a UN position. Provoking and "Buzzing" the UN. The list is endless.

Constantly? Err, no. They've obliged the UN on a number of occasions in the past. They've also allowed the creation of the PA, the formation of a fully armed palestinian police force, palestinian controlled facilities, a civilian administration for 98% of all Palestinians in the west bank & gaza, and democratic elections which brought forth Hamas into the real limelight. But lets not acknowledge any of that, and focus on everything they've avoided.

Shelling the UN... I can't quite understand this one either. Despite the claims of the troops in the area, that Hezbollah forces were placing them in danger and using their area to launch attacks, Israel definetly shouldn't have shelled that area. Actually I do agree with you. However, I place the blame on the UN. Their observers should have had the military capacity to either puch Hezbollah away from their position, or left the area once they realised what was happening. Being neutral doesn't mean you have to be powerless.

As for Buzzing the UN, its a strange one. Can't see the point of it myself. Especially since the UN have fire orders regarding Israeli forces, but nothing in place for Hezbollah. In fact, they have nothing in place regarding Hezbollah should hezbollah decide to resume the war. And as for disarming/disbanding Hezbollah which was part of the ceasefire agreement which the UN brokered? ha! that disappeared rather quickly once Israel started withdawing.

The list is indeed endless if you look at Israel's actions in a vaccum without ever considering the actions of the Palestinians, the Lebanese, the Syrians, etc. If you ignore 60+ years of violence, and the ineptitude of external nations trying to dabble in the whole area. But hey, its easier to just focus on israel and never acknowledge Palestinian attacks, their tactics, or the failures to commit to their own agreements.

sovtek

Deleted User wrote:

Probably? Nope. Not really. Read Israeli reports of clashes with Palestinian forces. Many of their reports will make mention of casualties in the form of 3 militants and 2 civilians killed in an exchange of fire. Many of the deaths in that total above comes from larger incidents like the latest artillery "mistake" which killed 18 civilians. (Which I doubt was a mistake, despite my Israeli sympathies)

The other side of the coin though is the use of civilians while making attacks on Israeli patrols, or using their own people as human shields against israeli attacks, thus placing them in a position of harm.
(http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1162378457992&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull)

The "more than 400 deaths" listed above suggest that they were all killed directly by Israeli's without taking into account the presence of Paramilitary forces, firing on Israeli troops (Afterall, Palestinian forces being perfect shots, they'd never make a mistake and hit their own people).

Oh, and the uniform issue won't get you anywhere. It doesn't matter that Israeli forces wear uniforms which set them apart from civilians, and Palestinian forces don't. The only thing that matters is that civilians die, and that Israel is the cause of it all.

I haven't seen anyone suggest that it's "all Isreal's fault". However Israel is most surely the instigator and the weakest link on the path to peace. They are the aggressors/occupiers/colonists.
The only documented cases of "human shields" are on the Israeli side in Jenin.
You can't accuse resistance fighters of using human shields when they are fighting on their own territory unless they are deliberately doing so. No one's come up with anything convincing in that regard.
I suppose it doesn't matter that Israel also have billions in military aid and an unbridled economy in order to afford uniforms as well as enormous firepower so as not to necessitate the use of guerilla tactics.
The above mentioned also underscoring that to live in peace/security all Israel needs to do is stop occupying these people's land.

sovtek

Deleted User wrote:

As Sesshoumaru mentions below, there's no mention of suspending attacks by other means on Israeli positions or forces. Until Palestinian forces commit to such a move, I doubt we'll see Israel withdrawing its forces. Afterall, every time they've withdrawn from an area, attacks have actually increased.

Since 2000 there have several cease fires upheld by the likes of Hamas and the PLO that Israel have broken.

nacho libre

nacho libre wrote:

no... what matters is when civilians die due to deliberate targeting by Israeli forces. I agree with you not all civilians death are Israels fault but some are. Do you justify deliberate targeting? I suspect you deny it happens.

Actually if you read my post again, you'll see I said I doubted that the artillery attack that killed the 18 civilians was a mistake. In fact I do believe that Israeli forces make deliberate attacks on civilians. And I'm not even going to try pass it off the way many posters try to pass off Palestinian attacks on israeli civilians. Its wrong for either side to do.

Jimboo_Jones

Deleted User wrote:

The other side of the coin though is the use of civilians while making attacks on Israeli patrols, or using their own people as human shields against israeli attacks, thus placing them in a position of harm.

I wonder what your take on Israel using human shields is?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3650791.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1937599.stm

Frederico

Sesshoumaru wrote:

So that means they have killed around 200 terrorists as well. Way to go IDF! Probably most of the remaining 200 "civilians" were terrorists as well. Its not like they put on an army uniform before they go out to murder Jews.

Are you saying that those children who were blown apart are terrorists?
Are you justifying the murdering of civilians?
I don't condone 'collateral' damage when it's caused by terrorism or by state terrorism, and whether the perpetrators are wearing uniforms or not.

Your post seems scarily like something that psycho Rumsfeld would say before they booted him out.

Hobbes

sovtek wrote:

Since 2000 there have several cease fires upheld by the likes of Hamas and the PLO that Israel have broken.

Beat me too it. I recall these as well and I recall Israels administration saying something along the lines of "We welcome this, but we still have the right to bomb the fuk out of whoever we so choose" and continued to do so.

TBH its like picking sides in the Northern Ireland conflict. Both are as bad as the other and trying to defend the actions of one isn't very workable when neither have the moral highground.