NationStates Jolt Archive

The israeli attack on the Beirut airport and its blockade of lebanese ports are despicable.

Collective punishment is always despicable and is a profound and shameful disgrace to whichever country makes it a policy.

Is a third thread strictly necessary?

The israeli attack on the Beirut airport and its blockade of lebanese ports is despicable.

Collective punishment is always despicable and is a profound and shameful disgrace to whichever country makes it a policy.
Indeed. I'm in favour of some return collective punishment, preferably also by airstriking all of Israels power network and road systesms, as well as a blockade and invading some parts of the country.

Just to see how they like it.

Is a third thread strictly necessary?
Most likely not, but I feel like adding to my post count a bit, so it's fine.

The israeli attack on the Beirut airport and its blockade of lebanese ports is despicable.

Collective punishment is always despicable and is a profound and shameful disgrace to whichever country makes it a policy.

It's not collective punishment. It's called stopping the influx of weapons for Hezbollah, which is organized and paid for by Lebanon and Syria.

Besides, there are already other threads on this topic.

BTW, it's not despicable. Hezbollah and the Palestinians attacked first.

After that, anything is fair game.

After that, anything is fair game.
I must've missed the news article where hezbollah blew up Israel's favorite bridge.

It's not collective punishment. It's called stopping the influx of weapons for Hezbollah, which is organized and paid for by Lebanon and Syria.

Besides, there are already other threads on this topic.

BTW, it's not despicable. Hezbollah and the Palestinians attacked first.

After that, anything is fair game.


No more fair game than shooting someone's family because he shoplifted from your store.

It's not collective punishment. It's called stopping the influx of weapons for Hezbollah, which is organized and paid for by Lebanon and Syria.
You don't see the UK blowing up the US' infrastructure for the sake of it giving the IRA Armalites, though, do you?
Besides, there are already other threads on this topic.
Yes, there are, but there's no need to be rude.
BTW, it's not despicable. Hezbollah and the Palestinians attacked first.
This is an extremely long-running conflict. You cannot say that Hezbollah and Palestine attacked first without going into the underlying reasons for these attacks, which are mostly that Israel is seeking to retake these regions.
After that, anything is fair game.
After anyone invades, taking their soldiers prisoner is fair game in my opinion. I hope they've all been capped in the head, because if Israel wants to have its soldiers back and they're already dead, that'll allay their problems, no?

No more fair game than shooting someone's family because he shoplifted from your store.

Property and human lives are not equal. The Palestinians and Hezbollah are both kidnapping and killing.

A very, very poor analogy on your part.

Property and human lives are not equal. The Palestinians and Hezbollah are both kidnapping and killing.

A very, very poor analogy on your part.


Not at all, the principle of collective punishment is no more or less despicable in one case than the other.

Replace "shooting" with "jailing" if you dont think the incidentals of the punishment fit the incidentals of the crime.

The population of lebanon is being unjustly attacked.

Israel escalates these problems at its own peril.

Property and human lives are not equal. The Palestinians and Hezbollah are both kidnapping and killing.

A very, very poor analogy on your part.
I wholeheartedly agree, in fact I consider the IDF true Paladins of Freedom, who are so nice that they just kill everyone dead for looking remotely dangerous.

Because let's face it - that's OK, as is smashing peoples' infrastructure and homes, because you're not kidnapping them, which is for some reason considered as bad as barbequeing baby deers on a fire made from the true cross, marinaded in the blood of martyrs by the Israeli government.

The population of lebanon is being unjustly attacked.



You help arm the enemy of a nation significantly more powerful than yours, you deserve what you get, period.

Is a third thread strictly necessary?

4th by my count. And as a newb, you havent recognised that each of thos will go it's own separate way....

4th by my count. And as a newb, you havent recognised that each of thos will go it's own separate way....

But it's too much to keep up with. :(
And I have recognised this... I'd have to be really dense not to.

Hopefully Israel will wipe out a few more militants in the process of what its doing. I fully support their actions.

4th by my count. And as a newb, you havent recognised that each of thos will go it's own separate way....
There have only been three threads on this incident (I started the first). The other thread has been going on a couple days.

Hopefully Israel will wipe out all of the militants in the process of what its doing. I fully support their actions.


Fixed

This is an extremely long-running conflict. You cannot say that Hezbollah and Palestine attacked first without going into the underlying reasons for these attacks, which are mostly that Israel is seeking to retake these regions.


No it's the fact that Israel EXISTS is what these people can't stand.

There have only been three threads on this incident (I started the first). The other thread has been going on a couple days.

Try counting -
1 (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=491464), 2 (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=491654), and 3 (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=491655).
That makes this #4.

And, AFAIK, you aren't Greater Alemannia, whose started the first thread yesterday. The incident hasn't "been going on a couple days", thus the original thread can't have been.

You seem to have a knack for putting your foot in it tonight....

No it's the fact that Israel EXISTS is what these people can't stand.

Who? The Palestinians?

Most Palestinians Want a Two State Solution (http://www.jmcc.org/publicpoll/results/2006/no57.pdf)

Lebanese? I doubt it considering they have their own country.

Hezb'allah? Maybe. Then again they're a terrorist group, not representative of Lebanon.

I am all for human rights and for protecting civilians and all that, I am extremely liberal in many views.

BUt the only way to deal with poor, desperate, brainwashed people who are trained to hate your race and country so much so, that they will kill themselves to kill you, you have no choice but to take extreme action against them, all of them.

and the worse part is the reason this whole hate of isreal started is because we took land that we won back for the muslims from nazi germany and gave a little strip of it so that the jewish people had a home to escape persecution on the scale of ww2 ever again. We fought the nazis so that they would be free again and then they crap on us like this


edit: I didnt read all of the posts, I just put my general idea of the situation

Well, as I understand it, Israel feel that their nation's existance is threatened when they are attacked, since they're more or less surrounded by enemies.

It doesn't matter that most of those "enemies" want a peaceful solution. The extreme elements (a few of which are supported by some of the governments in the surrounding countries) will take all the focus and condemn everyone.
As well, Israel use nasty methods to fight back, and often responds excessively (says I, sitting safe and unthreatened half a globe away... My perspective is admittedly different, than either side's).

However, I've seen this conflict come and go in waves my entire life.
It seems the solution that would cost least lives would be to evacuate the area and then nuke the shit out of it.
Make the holy land uninhabitable for the next 10.000 years or so and there's no reason left to fight.

I'd gladly ceded half our country to the jews if they want a nation of their own. Same with Palenstine.
It'd be worth it just to get an end to the killing.

Now I know this may sound uopian, but I think that Isreal and Palestine conflict could easily be resovled if Isreal would roll over and allow Palestinistinans the right to return to homeland, but of course they would never do this because they would quickly loose control to the super-majority of Palestinistinans, so basicilly we have mirority in power taking more and more violent eratic action to maintain control.
I know people will say Isreal is trying to denfend itself, but this is the wrong way to do it. Blockading Lebanon is like sticking your finger in a hole in damn only to have the water flow over the top

Hopefully Israel will wipe out a few more militants in the process of what its doing. I fully support their actions.
Yep. :)

It's not collective punishment. It's called stopping the influx of weapons for Hezbollah, which is organized and paid for by Lebanon and Syria.

Besides, there are already other threads on this topic.

BTW, it's not despicable. Hezbollah and the Palestinians attacked first.

After that, anything is fair game.

Actually its financed by Iran...but don't mind facts...nasty things...

Hopefully Israel will wipe out a few more militants in the process of what its doing. I fully support their actions.
Yeah, and I hope that the surrounding states wipe out a few more members of the IDF. It would be great, and I fully support their actions.

When you attack other states, you really deserve to get suicide-bombed. You're asking for it, no?

A friend of mine went on a trip to Beirut last April, and he described it as the "Amsterdam of the Middle-East". Bars and nightclubs were open until late at night, and they apparently even had a couple of gay-bars. He also saw hardly any veiled women on the streets, and even a few goths. The place damn well had plenty of tourist potential.

He has been to Dubai, Kuwait and Amman as well, so he knows where he's talking about.
Of course you have a few hicks in the hills (which in the ME tend to go with terrorist organizations like Hezbollah or Baath, just like in the good ol' USA with the GOP)

Israel needs to STFU. All they do is provocating, and if somebody tells them off, they start whining like a wee child "but it's all because of the Germans..."
They bully all the others, but OMFG if they get picked on in return...

Then they're allowed the likes of disrupting economies, destroying people's lives, and killing as much as they damn well please.

I'm a outspoken anti-fascist person, but every once in a while lately, especially after the eight o'clock news, and usually after i've read the morning paper, i'm having this thought, what if Hitler was allowed in power until he had finished the endlösing...

I dunno if i'd actually give a damn if Ahmadinejad would use it for target practice...

You help arm the enemy of a nation significantly more powerful than yours, you deserve what you get, period.

Maybe if Lebanon did not harbor terrorists and allow them to launch rockets and other attacks into Israel this would not have happened. In the end it is Lebanon’s fault they allow the terrorists to operate from within there boarders, thus the get what they deserve.

Maybe if Lebanon did not harbor terrorists and allow them to launch rockets and other attacks into Israel this would not have happened. In the end it is Lebanon’s fault they allow the terrorists to operate from within there boarders, thus the get what they deserve.
Every nation "Harbours terrorists" as it is so eloquentely put by the US and by extention Israel. That's because terrorists are people like you and me who are simply drawn towards a particular cause due to hatred over something.

As Ghandi said - One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

How the hell can Israel get disgraced? Don't they have to be graced first?

:p

As Ghandi said - One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

Ghandi was describing the cause they were fighting for, not the tatics they use

Using any kind of weaponary to instill fear into the civilian population of a country to force political pressure on the government is terrorism.

Terrorism is sharply distinguised from freedom fighting because freedom fighting involves attcking the armies of those who opress you, not the civilians of that armies country.

Terrorisms sharp distinction occurs again with intention. Whilst some civilians will sometimes die as a result of targeting infrasturcure and millitary instalations, that is a long way from intentionally targeting civilian centres to kill as many civilians as you can to instill terror in the citizenry

Its an exemplar to the remainder of the world as to how one should deal with terrorists.

When you attack other states, you really deserve to get suicide-bombed. You're asking for it, no?


Correction, when you get suicide bombed then the other states deserve to get invaded. Palestine and Lebanon are asking for it, no? ;)

The israeli attack on the Beirut airport and its blockade of lebanese ports is despicable.

Collective punishment is always despicable and is a profound and shameful disgrace to whichever country makes it a policy.

I'll toast to that. I cannot wait to mark the 'Occupied' part of 'Occupied Palestine' off my map :)

The israeli attack on the Beirut airport and its blockade of lebanese ports is despicable.

Collective punishment is always despicable and is a profound and shameful disgrace to whichever country makes it a policy.


Historically if you want to win a war you have to make the populace no longer want to support fighting you. Andrew Jackson did this in the American Civil war (or the war between the states if you are from south of the mason dixon line) by burning everything on his way to atlanta, did it work? To a degree, do I agree it's a good tactic, yeah. But, there is always the chance of a backlash and the people you are trying to get to stop supporting your enemy may dig in and decide not only to support them but to fight you as well.

There are no simple answers to what's right or wrong in the midle east, the problems there are hundreds or thousands of years old and all parties need to want to sit down and have peace, until that happens there won't be a true peace in our lifetime.

Sorry for such a long post for my first one, but I had to pipe up here.

Historically if you want to win a war you have to make the populace no longer want to support fighting you. Andrew Jackson did this in the American Civil war (or the war between the states if you are from south of the mason dixon line) by burning everything on his way to atlanta, did it work? To a degree, do I agree it's a good tactic, yeah. But, there is always the chance of a backlash and the people you are trying to get to stop supporting your enemy may dig in and decide not only to support them but to fight you as well.

There are no simple answers to what's right or wrong in the midle east, the problems there are hundreds or thousands of years old and all parties need to want to sit down and have peace, until that happens there won't be a true peace in our lifetime.

Sorry for such a long post for my first one, but I had to pipe up here.
That wasn't Andrew Jackson, try again.
Not to mention there are cultural differences. Everyone forgets that cultures are different.

I prey in my own silly atheist way every night that the US withdraws it's support for Israel and it's mindless agression. In that action, we would see the relaesing of the hounds as every arab/persian nation launched every missile it had at that prick of a country. If they managed to survive, I'd imagine that Israel would be much more interested in going to the negotiation table than they hae been for the last 50 years.

Maybe if Lebanon did not harbor terrorists and allow them to launch rockets and other attacks into Israel this would not have happened. In the end it is Lebanon’s fault they allow the terrorists to operate from within there boarders, thus the get what they deserve.

Not sure if you're arguing with me or not, but my statement was "You (meaning Lebanon) help arm the enemy (the terrorist groups) of a nation significantly more powerful than yours (Israel), you (Lebanon) deserve what you get, period.

I agree with you. Lebanon has allowed terrorist groups to exist within its borders that have carried out attacks on Israel. Israel has the sovereign right to defend itself from those attacks in whatever way secures their defenses. If Lebanon had been more willing to be proactive and help eliminate these terrorist groups operating with impunity before this happened, I would have agreed that Israel has gone too far.

However Lebanon has aided these groups, permitted their continued operation and existance within their boarders, and thus has left Israel with no choice but to take matters into its own hands, and go after these terrorist groups, and any (including Lebanon) nations or organizations that aid them.

Correction, when you get suicide bombed then the other states deserve to get invaded. Palestine and Lebanon are asking for it, no? ;)

There were no suicide bombings involved here. Military attacks - both well executed - against military targets.

I cant help but notice a couple of you seem to be supporting the Anti-Israeli's here. Yootopia are you muslim? It would explain alot.

Israel and the Jews have as much a right to exist as anyone else or any other nation. Of course Israel feels threatened, it is surrounded by enemies on all sides and needs to show force to deter hostile nations. They need to be strong to survive. If it came to all out war I know which flag i'd fly. The Star of David for sure.

There were no suicide bombings involved here. Military attacks - both well executed - against military targets.

I think what the poster you are quoting meant to imply is that when you allow terrorists and suicide bombers to operate within your borders (as Lebanon has done) then you open yourself up to reprisal by those whom the terrorists and suicide bombers have attacked, in this case Israel.

Historically if you want to win a war you have to make the populace no longer want to support fighting you. Andrew Jackson did this in the American Civil war (or the war between the states if you are from south of the mason dixon line) by burning everything on his way to atlanta, did it work? To a degree, do I agree it's a good tactic, yeah. But, there is always the chance of a backlash and the people you are trying to get to stop supporting your enemy may dig in and decide not only to support them but to fight you as well.

There are no simple answers to what's right or wrong in the midle east, the problems there are hundreds or thousands of years old and all parties need to want to sit down and have peace, until that happens there won't be a true peace in our lifetime.

Sorry for such a long post for my first one, but I had to pipe up here.


A "chance of a backlash" ?

If the israelis should have learned one thing in their numerous military misadventures, it is that they are experts par excellence at creating backlash.

Now, a lot of lebanese who otherwise probably didnt worry too much about israel have a very good and just reason to be angry.

I'm gonna say what I really think so I expect more than a few will jump on me. Bring it on...


I think that the USA should pull its dick outta Isreal's ass and stop blindly backing that country. Economically it's the best off in that small region.

In addition I think that what Isreal is doing is just disgusting and in no way at all a representation of a good democratic nation. Just to all those people who are gonna start attacking me for this... just consider this one point. First of all before I go further we all talk about the situation as something far off that we aren't a part of. Maybe true, but consider this: All of a sudden a bomb hits your house and kills your entire family, maybe even you. Nonono, it is all good and Fucking Fair because for Isreal to defend itself in club of 100 people, where 9 of them are picking on it, it has to mow down the entire Goddammed room.

Stop arguing about the fucking politics and think about the people assholes (not everyone, dont be offended). Think about the mother who's husband died trying to use his body as a shield for his son when an enraged Isrealie platoon gunned them both to death (I'm sure at least a few remember that footage). Think about the Isrealie boy who's mom and dad just got killed by some dumbass suicide bomber.

The only way in hell that this conflict is going to get better is for the Isrealies as the stronger group, to do something progressive and not regressive.

Just think about what I said and read before flamming me for my honest views. And every nation on Earth (maybe not Canada..) harbors terrorists wether they know it or not. Spain, England, Turkey (terrorists bombing a muslim country OMG?!), USA....

Phew got that out of my system... now off to bed! :p

I cant help but notice a couple of you seem to be supporting the Anti-Israeli's here. Yootopia are you muslim? It would explain alot.

Israel and the Jews have as much a right to exist as anyone else or any other nation. Of course Israel feels threatened, it is surrounded by enemies on all sides and needs to show force to deter hostile nations. They need to be strong to survive. If it came to all out war I know which flag i'd fly. The Star of David for sure.

accusing people who object to the actions of the IDF of anti-semitism is a low blow and the refuge of someone who has lost the moral argument

The israeli attack on the Beirut airport and its blockade of lebanese ports is despicable.

Collective punishment is always despicable and is a profound and shameful disgrace to whichever country makes it a policy.

Hmm. Israel leaves Beirut and the Gaza strip as peace gestures, then gets attacked repeatedly by those they turned the lands over to.

I am no great fan of Israel. I am not Jewish. But given the circumstances, I hope they kill enough of these bastards (like they did in the 67' "Six Days War".) to keep them quiet for a long, long time.

Ghandi was describing the cause they were fighting for, not the tatics they use

Using any kind of weaponary to instill fear into the civilian population of a country to force political pressure on the government is terrorism.

Terrorism is sharply distinguised from freedom fighting because freedom fighting involves attcking the armies of those who opress you, not the civilians of that armies country.

Terrorisms sharp distinction occurs again with intention. Whilst some civilians will sometimes die as a result of targeting infrasturcure and millitary instalations, that is a long way from intentionally targeting civilian centres to kill as many civilians as you can to instill terror in the citizenry
I'm sorry, which side are you referring to? As happens depressingly often in the ME both sides seem to fit the description excellently.

Israel and the Jews have as much a right to exist as anyone else or any other nation. Of course Israel feels threatened, it is surrounded by enemies on all sides and needs to show force to deter hostile nations. They need to be strong to survive. If it came to all out war I know which flag i'd fly. The Star of David for sure.
Israel has a mediterranean coastline, so not on all sides. The argument with Israel was that it was a state created by the West on what was not their land without self-determinism etc, which a lot of people would argue is not anywhere near as much right to exist as a state set up by the majority of people living there. Sending troops into another country is not detterance, it's called an invasion.

Or if you like, turn it around, lebanon needed to show force to deter a hostile nation, namely Israel; so they're allowed to invade them. Or Iran to invade the USA since they're hostile and need to be deterrred. Would you go along with that?

Also, to whoever said it, Israel is hardly a small strip of land.

A "chance of a backlash" ?

If the israelis should have learned one thing in their numerous military misadventures, it is that they are experts par excellence at creating backlash.

Now, a lot of lebanese who otherwise probably didnt worry too much about israel have a very good and just reason to be angry.

Let them be angry. But let them also be scared. Scared that should they continue this cycle it will only bring down the superior military might of the nation they attacked on their heads, their homes, their families, their government, and anyone else nearby.

Let them be angry, but let them also be scared. And let them know that if they leave Israel alone, Israel will leave them the fuck alone.

Or if you like, turn it around, lebanon needed to show force to deter a hostile nation, namely Israel; so they're allowed to invade them. Or Iran to invade the USA since they're hostile and need to be deterrred. Would you go along with that?



Do you think if Lebanon had a chance in hell of winning a war against Israel that they wouldn't have invaded a long time ago? Or the same for Iran and America? To say that is it "ok for them to do it assumes that they wouldn't in a heartbeat if they thought they could get away with it.

Time and again Israel has been diplomatic. They have withdrawn troops, they have given land settlements, they have done a great deal, and EVERY TIME it is met with more terrorist acts. The fallacy of "just give them what they want and they'll stop" has been exposed to the world, just as appeasement of Hitler was shown to be an error. These groups dont want land, they don't want to peacefully coexist. They want Israel destroyed. This is no matter of diplomacy, it has become a matter of survival.

Israel is NOT the one who set those terms, but for myself I'm quite happy to let them operate under them

Ghandi was describing the cause they were fighting for, not the tatics they use

Using any kind of weaponary to instill fear into the civilian population of a country to force political pressure on the government is terrorism.

Terrorism is sharply distinguised from freedom fighting because freedom fighting involves attcking the armies of those who opress you, not the civilians of that armies country.

Terrorisms sharp distinction occurs again with intention. Whilst some civilians will sometimes die as a result of targeting infrasturcure and millitary instalations, that is a long way from intentionally targeting civilian centres to kill as many civilians as you can to instill terror in the citizenry

Well Hezbollah attacked the IDF. The IDF killed 50 or so civillians in retaliation.

Hmm. Israel leaves Beirut and the Gaza strip as peace gestures, then gets attacked repeatedly by those they turned the lands over to.

The Israelis withdrew to Southern lebanon, where they bombarded UN troops via their 'christian militia' for a few years. They still hold the 'Shaba farms' area. In addition they withdrew from Beirut when the PLO agreed to pull out of Lebanon. The condition was that the families of the fighters not be harmed. Lo and behold who opens the gates of two camps to the militias....?

And the occupied territories consist primarily of the West Bank and Arab East Jerusalem.

HOWELLS CONDEMNS ISRAELI AIRSTRIKE ON GAZA (12/07/06)


The Minister for the Middle East, Dr Kim Howells, said today:

'I was gravely concerned to hear of the death of Palestinian civilians, including a mother and her seven children, and a high number of injuries following an Israeli airstrike in Gaza City today.

'We have repeatedly expressed our concerns about Israel's policy of targeted killings. The killing of innocent civilians, and particularly children, is unacceptable.

'We urge on the Israeli authorities to respect their obligations under international law and to take all possible precautions to avoid civilian casualties, particularly children. In addition we call for an immediate halt to all rocket fire from the Gaza Strip into Israel.'

just disregard if it has been post elese where

Do you think if Lebanon had a chance in hell of winning a war against Israel that they wouldn't have invaded a long time ago? Or the same for Iran and America? To say that is it "ok for them to do it assumes that they wouldn't in a heartbeat if they thought they could get away with it.

I'm not saying they wouldn't, I'm not saying OK. I just think that they'd have the same justification (or lack thereof in my opinion) for invading. And I doubted that the poster would have backed it turned around like that, so am challenging his justification for claiming it was justified.



Time and again Israel has been diplomatic. They have withdrawn troops, they have given land settlements, they have done a great deal, and EVERY TIME it is met with more terrorist acts. The fallacy of "just give them what they want and they'll stop" has been exposed to the world, just as appeasement of Hitler was shown to be an error. These groups dont want land, they don't want to peacefully coexist. They want Israel destroyed. This is no matter of diplomacy, it has become a matter of survival.

Israel is NOT the one who set those terms, but for myself I'm quite happy to let them operate under them
They have given with one hand and taken with the other. They still (as far as I'm aware) illegally occupy land gained from Arab nations via war. You're also making the very large jump of terrorrist groups = arab countries. Which is not true. Some groups are sponsored by some Arab countries, but you can't tar them all like that for convenience's sake.

Also, the west made a lot more effort negotiating with the IRA etc in Ireland, and American sources funded them. So is it because they're muslim, or because they're arabs, or some other reason that we're condeming and ready to throw the towel in so much faster.

Israel is NOT the one who set those terms, but for myself I'm quite happy to let them operate under them

but they are, they chose to found a jewish state right on islam and christianities most holy sites.

there were a number of less volatile alternatives

Israel illegally occupying areas of arab nations they took during war....first off, from what I've heard (I'm admittedly far from an expert of middle eastern relations, I'll leave to that to my buddy who's attending university on that subject) they gave most if not all that land back, and that land was taken in wars that were started or prompted by the arab nations. The present situation was started becasue the palestinians and Hezbollah attacked Israel. As for people saying Israel has lost a dozen soldiers trying to recover three, bear in mind that most of the troops they've lost recently were killed in the attacks to capture those three soldiers. As for Israel killing civilians, yes, they have, but the difference is that Israel kills civilians accidently (despite some incidents, but I doubt any nation except maybe Switzerland can claim innocence in that regard) while the palestinians and Hezbollah deliberately target civilians (suicide bombings, rockets). As for the families killed in targeted killings, well, you marry a terrorist, then you most likely fully support said terrorist and are therefore an enemy. As for the kids, they would have been terrorists once they were old enough, assuming they weren't already. And as for Israel bombing civilian infrastructure and the associated civilian deaths...it ain't pretty, but it's war, and that's the shit that happens in war.

but they are, they chose to found a jewish state right on islam and christianities most holy sites.



It is also one of the most holy sites in the Jewish Relgion. :headbang:


smooth, really smooth.

Didn't the jews build Jersusalem in the first place?

but they are, they chose to found a jewish state right on islam and christianities most holy sites.

there were a number of less volatile alternatives

There is a jewish state on Mecca now?

You're also making the very large jump of terrorrist groups = arab countries. Which is not true. Some groups are sponsored by some Arab countries, but you can't tar them all like that for convenience's sake.

Lebanon is largely under the control of Hezbollah. Certainly a terrorist organization and Syria sponsers it with a large presence of that terrorist organization as well. The terrorists entered Israeli territory and captured a couple of their soldiers. An act of war and Israel has every right to go into Lebanon to get their captured soldiers back.

Israel illegally occupying areas of arab nations they took during war....first off, from what I've heard (I'm admittedly far from an expert of middle eastern relations, I'll leave to that to my buddy who's attending university on that subject) they gave most if not all that land back, and that land was taken in wars that were started or prompted by the arab nations. The present situation was started becasue the palestinians and Hezbollah attacked Israel. As for people saying Israel has lost a dozen soldiers trying to recover three, bear in mind that most of the troops they've lost recently were killed in the attacks to capture those three soldiers. As for Israel killing civilians, yes, they have, but the difference is that Israel kills civilians accidently (despite some incidents, but I doubt any nation except maybe Switzerland can claim innocence in that regard) while the palestinians and Hezbollah deliberately target civilians (suicide bombings, rockets).
All palestinians? Also, as far as I can tell, the kidnapped soldiers were legitimate targets. If (as many Israeli-supporters are claiming) this is a war, then the capture of those soldiers was perfectly fair and legal.


As for the families killed in targeted killings, well, you marry a terrorist, then you most likely fully support said terrorist and are therefore an enemy. As for the kids, they would have been terrorists once they were old enough, assuming they weren't already. Ah yes, children always follow their parents exactly. A fair trial and being charged for something you have actually done is wonderful isn't it. It is NOT a crime to be related to a terrorrist. Or is being born illegal now?


And as for Israel bombing civilian infrastructure and the associated civilian deaths...it ain't pretty, but it's war, and that's the shit that happens in war.
So the kidnapping of the soldiers was fine then? Also I'm under the impression that (despite Bush's claims) you need a country to declare war on. You can't declare war on Hezbullah and say they represent the Arab governments, anymore than you could have declared war on the IRA and say they represent Ireland or all US citizens on the grounds that they received funds from some of them.

The israeli attack on the Beirut airport and its blockade of lebanese ports is despicable.

Collective punishment is always despicable and is a profound and shameful disgrace to whichever country makes it a policy.

Yes cause punishing terrorist sponsoring nations is wrong, just wrong! Don't we already have a thread discussing Israel? Let's keep your bleeding heart opinions in there instead of having it spill out to more of the forum.

The United States needs to cut off all support for Israel. Immediately. I am absolutely sick of Israel attacking anything and everything whenever just a few soldiers are attacked. Focus your attacks on the people who made them, not the entire damned country.

Of course, I can just see Israel threatening to nuke the U.S. for withdrawing support. I don't know why. But it just seems like they would threaten to do it.

Lebanon is largely under the control of Hezbollah. Certainly a terrorist organization and Syria sponsers it with a large presence of that terrorist organization as well. The terrorists entered Israeli territory and captured a couple of their soldiers. An act of war and Israel has every right to go into Lebanon to get their captured soldiers back.
Why are they terrorrists? They had uniforms and captured military personnel. Sounds like normal war practice rather than terrorrism.

Is a third thread strictly necessary?

No but it has meaning

schadenfreude \SHOD-n-froy-duh\, noun:
A malicious satisfaction obtained from the misfortunes of others.

Why are they terrorrists? They had uniforms and captured military personnel. Sounds like normal war practice rather than terrorrism.

Sounds like semantics to me. Besides that would be an even greater arguement that Israel has every right to enter the country that attacked them.

FullMetalJacket']Yes cause punishing terrorist sponsoring nations is wrong, just wrong! Don't we already have a thread discussing Israel? Let's keep your bleeding heart opinions in there instead of having it spill out to more of the forum.
No, killing civilians living in those countries is.

Indeed. I'm in favour of some return collective punishment, preferably also by airstriking all of Israels power network and road systesms, as well as a blockade and invading some parts of the country.

Just to see how they like it.
And have the Israeli's wig out and use nukes? No thank you.

Sounds like semantics to me. Besides that would be an even greater arguement that Israel has every right to enter the country that attacked them.
Israel seems to want it both ways. Either it was an act of war, or it was terrorrism. They want the right of counter attack that comes with an act of war, and the moral highground that comes with an act of terrorrism.


I'd agree (pending further evidence regarding hezbollah's control of Lebanon) that they have the right of counter attack, but that the capture of the soldiers was clearly not terrorrism.

Folks, when soldiers from one country enter and attack another country, then take prisoners of war, this is, very obviously, an act of war. Generally, it is perceived that attacking your enemy/defending yourself are perfectly normal practice in war. By the way, the airport was blown up, because it is a major Hezbollah (a terrorist group) base.

Yes, all Palestinians. While many want a two state solution, and I wish they get that, the fact is they elected a terorrist organization whose stated goal is the annihalation of Israel to power and have stood by and let said organization repeatedly attack Israel. If they, as a whole, want their own free and sovereign nation, then they have to stand against such organizations - they haven't. This is now a war because the Palestinians attacked Israel, and yes, military targets are legitimate, I never argued that they weren't, but that doesn't give the countries and people a right to bitch now that they started a war and are on the losing side of it. If you attack someone, even a military target, then you are going to get hit back, they should have thought about the consequences of their actions beforehand. I'm not saying children should be killed, I'm saying if they happen to be the children of a terrorist leader who is bombed then those children are a legitimate target. It is unfortunate, and I would rather they live and be raised in a good family that believes in such things as peace. You're right, you can't say Hezbollah represents arab governments and declare war on them, but you can declare war on the ones that support them (Syria, Iran, Lebanon). Kidnapping soldiers is fine during war, its war afterall, but be prepared to face the consquences of such action.

As for calling them terrorists, I'm using that term for lack of a better one and because it allows me to group to together Hezbollah, Palestinian groups, and there supporters. I suppose I should be using Jihadists, but, whatever, it's just a meaningless moniker. And as for assumptions that I support Bush, I don't, I think he's a dumbass and can rot in hell for all I care.

but they are, they chose to found a jewish state right on islam and christianities most holy sites.

there were a number of less volatile alternatives

First of all, while it is Christianity's fourth holiest sight and Islam's third holiest sight, it is actually Judaism's absolute holiest sight. What you said there was rather baseless. Additionally, Israel never chose to "found itself" there at all. Britain did. It was called the British Mandate; ever heard of it? Those were all territories of the UK at the time. They gave their own terrirtory (and, no, the Israelis didn't have an option to say, "No, we don't want this piece of land; give us something else."), and, in fact, the creation of Israel was the first act of the newly formed United Nations. By the way, the piece of land that Israel originally was was nothing but a worthless tiny sliver of desert that was far from Jerusalem. That city was divided into, as I recall, three pieces. Israel got one of the slummy bits far from their ancient and holy sites. Incidentally, the Palestinians were also offered a their own country at the same time (They got the land with water.), but the southern portions were claimed and occupied (and eventually annexed) by Egypt, the northern parts by Assyria, and the entire East and all other remaining pieces were take by Jordan. Those three countries also tried to take Israel, but, despite the fact that the British blocked them from getting weapons, they fought back. That's why Israel still exists and Palestine, up until recently, didn't.

Israel seems to want it both ways. Either it was an act of war, or it was terrorrism. They want the right of counter attack that comes with an act of war, and the moral highground that comes with an act of terrorrism.

The reason it is generally perceived as both war and terrorism is, because the governments of the countries with which they are now at war pay for and run the terrorist groups that attacked them. It's the same reason the United States attacked Afganistan. September 11th was clearly terrorism, but it was paid for and run by the government of Afganistan, thereby making it an act of war as well.

Yes, all Palestinians. While many want a two state solution, and I wish they get that, the fact is they elected a terorrist organization whose stated goal is the annihalation of Israel to power and have stood by and let said organization repeatedly attack Israel. If they, as a whole, want their own free and sovereign nation, then they have to stand against such organizations - they haven't.
When said organisation is the one giving out food on the streets, they suddenly seem a lot more reasonable, moreso when the other party is reported to be corrupt. People vote for Sinn Fein now and people in general don't seem to be bothered to anything like the same extent.


This is now a war because the Palestinians attacked Israel, and yes, military targets are legitimate, I never argued that they weren't, but that doesn't give the countries and people a right to bitch now that they started a war and are on the losing side of it. If you attack someone, even a military target, then you are going to get hit back, they should have thought about the consequences of their actions beforehand.
Ok, I was just making the point that the captures were not, as many people seem to be labelling them, terrorrism.


I'm not saying children should be killed, I'm saying if they happen to be the children of a terrorist leader who is bombed then those children are a legitimate target. It is unfortunate, and I would rather they live and be raised in a good family that believes in such things as peace.
To clarify, are you saying that children are legitimate targets, or acceptable collateral damage? And if the latter, are you saying that they are more acceptable collateral damage than random children?

The reason it is generally perceived as both war and terrorism is, because the governments of the countries with which they are now at war pay for and run the terrorist groups that attacked them. It's the same reason the United States attacked Afganistan. September 11th was clearly terrorism, but it was paid for and run by the government of Afganistan, thereby making it an act of war as well.
No, 9/11 was clearly terrorrism because it was a civillian target. This was a military target, and who carried it out is immaterial, this specific event was not an act of terrorrism.

No, 9/11 was clearly terrorrism because it was a civillian target. This was a military target, and who carried it out is immaterial, this specific event was not an act of terrorrism.

This specific even hasn't been reported as terrorism. Most events are (such as restaurant and bus bombings), becuase they do have civilian targets, but this, as I'm sure you have noticed, was reported as an act of war (which, by international law, it was). As a little note, though, the gray area is probably caused by the fact that a) the attack took place before war was declared (The same reason the attack on Pearl Harbor is sometimes considered terrorism.), and b) because the perpetrators are members of a known terrorist group (despite the fact that they are government-run (by Assyria and Lebanon)).

Children are acceptable collateral damage in times of war, so long as attempts are made to keep it at a minimum. It is unfortunate, but acceptable. And though that organization may have been handing out food it doesn't change the fact that the Palestinian people know those who are launching rockets and making them and yet do little to nothing. They had the chance to stand against Hamas and the rocket storms but they didn't. I feel sorry for the innocent Palestinians now suffering but still support Israel. As for Lebanon, that is a different story. The lebanese have allowed Hezbollah free reign, they now have bombs raining down on them. I hope the innocent Lebanese people are seen through this conflict safely and with as little suffering as possible, but I still say go Israel, you have my full support.

You're also making the very large jump of terrorrist groups = arab countries. Which is not true. Some groups are sponsored by some Arab countries, but you can't tar them all like that for convenience's sake.


Of course I dont mean to imply that all arab nations act in that way. Some arab nations do support some extreemist groups. Lebanon happens to be one of them. Thus I support this action. I would support it less, or not at all, if Lebanon had DONE SOMETHING about it before this.

Lebanon happens to be one of them.
You reckon?

Lebanon didn't even have a decent government until not too long ago. Then the Syrians blew up Hariri and that was the start of what so far has been a very positive story in Lebanon. It's a proper democracy, and I'm afraid that this will be destroyed now.

The reason Hezbollah is in Lebanon is because it is the militia of the Shia population there. Not only that, it is also their main political party - and the political part of the organisation isn't recognised as a terrorist organisation, at least in the EU.

Lebanon is really my favourite of the Arab countries, and I don't believe they deserve this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fouad_Siniora
You don't think the Israelis could sit down and talk with this man?

EDIT:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/13/AR2006071301310.html
Lebanon Says It Doesn't Control Hezbollah

Wracked by divisions over relations with Syria, the Western-backed government of Prime Minister Fuad Saniora has yet to muster the political will, or the courage, to disarm the guerrillas of the Shiite Hezbollah, allowing them to continue to operate with almost total autonomy in southern Lebanon.

Successive Lebanese governments have maintained that replacing the guerrillas by Lebanese army troops would be tantamount to offering Israel a free service _ protecting its northern border from guerrilla attacks.

Many in Lebanon _ particularly opponents of its ally Syria _ resent Hezbollah's free hand and feel that the government should do more to assert its authority. However, the dangers of taking on the group over its arms and the state-within-state role it has assumed in southern Lebanon carries serious risks.

Supposedly the two soldiers are being transported to Iran.

Israel will go after them, even if it means shelling a mile wide highway all the way to Iran.

If/when they get there, perhaps we should have a go.

Supposedly the two soldiers are being transported to Iran.
Link?

Please try and keep the conspiracy theories to a minimum. The situation is confusing enough as it is.

Link?

Please try and keep the conspiracy theories to a minimum. The situation is confusing enough as it is.

True. I don't think I could handle a conspiracy theory that didn't involve George Bush. :D

You reckon?

Lebanon didn't even have a decent government until not too long ago. Then the Syrians blew up Hariri and that was the start of what so far has been a very positive story in Lebanon. It's a proper democracy, and I'm afraid that this will be destroyed now.

The reason Hezbollah is in Lebanon is because it is the militia of the Shia population there. Not only that, it is also their main political party - and the political part of the organisation isn't recognised as a terrorist organisation, at least in the EU.

Lebanon is really my favourite of the Arab countries, and I don't believe they deserve this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fouad_Siniora
You don't think the Israelis could sit down and talk with this man?

Lebanon was a great place. I have a few buddies at school from there. BEAUTIFUL place, at least it used to.

I can understand Israel wanting to go after terrorist, but killing every man, woman and child along the way isn't the way to do it!

You reckon?

Lebanon didn't even have a decent government until not too long ago. Then the Syrians blew up Hariri and that was the start of what so far has been a very positive story in Lebanon. It's a proper democracy, and I'm afraid that this will be destroyed now.

Roughly 1/5 of the properly democratically elected members of the Lebanese parliament are part Hesbollah. I don't buy this "Lebanon can't control Hesbollah!" argument, Hesbollah is part of their nice and proper democracy.

Which only goes to prove my point. Given a nice proper democray, the people of Lebanon, under their own free will, elect members of a terrorist organization to more than 20% of the seats of their government.

Roughly 1/5 of the properly democratically elected members of the Lebanese parliament are part Hesbollah. I don't buy this "Lebanon can't control Hesbollah!" argument, Hesbollah is part of their nice and proper democracy.

Which only goes to prove my point. Given a nice proper democray, the people of Lebanon, under their own free will, elect members of a terrorist organization to more than 20% of the seats of their government.
Sinn Fein anyone?

The israeli attack on the Beirut airport and its blockade of lebanese ports is despicable.

Collective punishment is always despicable and is a profound and shameful disgrace to whichever country makes it a policy.
The fact of the matter is that the Arabs simply REFUSE to live in peace next to the Jews. Hence, the rocket attacks on Israel. The Israelis are doing what they need to do in order to protect themselves. Put yourself in their position. After all, the Gaza withdrawal was in return for the Arabs' promise of peace and no more attacks on civilians. Clearly, the Arabs broke this agreement with Israel, just like every other agreement they ever made with the Israelis.

Sinn Fein anyone?

What about it? I'm not saying the people of Lebanon don't have the right to elect who they chose to their own government.

I'm saying that by electing terrorists to positions of their government, the people of Lebanon must bare the results of their actions.

They elected terrorists to their government, they allowed those terrorists to make decisions within that government, they permitted those terrorists to continue attacks into Israel...they bare the burden of the concequences of those choices.

I can understand Israel wanting to go after terrorist, but killing every man, woman and child along the way isn't the way to do it!
That's not what they're doing at all. They're merely taking over the territory in order to establish a buffer zone.

I can understand Israel wanting to go after terrorist, but killing every man, woman and child along the way isn't the way to do it!

To date a total of 47 people from Lebanon have died. of a population of 3.8 million.

.000012% is hardly "every man, woman and child"

Yes, all Palestinians. While many want a two state solution, and I wish they get that, the fact is they elected a terorrist organization whose stated goal is the annihalation of Israel to power and have stood by and let said organization repeatedly attack Israel.

The Palestinians did not elect Hamas to wipe out Israel, but rather to stop corruption.
43.0% of Palestinians who voted for Hamas said they did vote for Hamas with the hope of ending the corruption
18.8% voted for Hamas for religious reasons.
Only 11.8% voted for Hamas because of its political agenda.

The israeli attack on the Beirut airport and its blockade of lebanese ports is despicable.

Collective punishment is always despicable and is a profound and shameful disgrace to whichever country makes it a policy.

You know what, I think your totally right, you know other countries face this every day. Look, Britain is just besieged (besieged I tell you!) by fanatical extremist states that every other decade try to wipe it out. America too for that matter, it is just so small and is just dwarfed by nations three or four times bigger than it and have a consistent approach to American relations, they tell her

"We gonna kill you! You, your momma, your dadda, and then your sister".

Really, with all these prime examples other nations set in their day to day activities I don't think Isreal should actually try anything, since when you look at from their prespective we are in the same boat as they are.

Damm, lets all face it, bad company corrupts, you are expressed by the pople you hang with, ect ect.... Lebenon should have read the warnings this past year and finally quell the independent Hazzabull quite some time ago, no any self respecting government should let a band of fanatical if well equipped soldiers dictate foreign policy, which Lebonon has indeed done.

That's not what they're doing at all. They're merely taking over the territory in order to establish a buffer zone.

and what gives them the right to take land from another country to create this buffer zone? Why don't they use their OWN land for this buffer zone?

The Palestinians did not elect Hamas to wipe out Israel, but rather to stop corruption.
43.0% of Palestinians who voted for Hamas said they did vote for Hamas with the hope of ending the corruption
18.8% voted for Hamas for religious reasons.
Only 11.8% voted for Hamas because of its political agenda.

Regardless of their motivation, they still voted for a party that has made it clear that their agenda is to destroy Israel. They knew what they were doing. Whether that was the primary reason or not, they still did it with knowledge of what they were doing

What about it? I'm not saying the people of Lebanon don't have the right to elect who they chose to their own government.

I'm saying that by electing terrorists to positions of their government, the people of Lebanon must bare the results of their actions.

They elected terrorists to their government, they allowed those terrorists to make decisions within that government, they permitted those terrorists to continue attacks into Israel...they bare the burden of the concequences of those choices.
Didn't see the British Army go apeshit when Sinn Fein were elected to either the Northern Ireland Assembly, or the Republic's Dail?

and what gives them the right to take land from another country to create this buffer zone? Why don't they use their OWN land for this buffer zone?

Hezbollah attacked Israel, Israel has the right then to defend themselves from Hezbollah attack, in whatever way is best for them.

What you said is the same logic as saying "why did the US have to attack Afghanistan, if they just evacuated Manhattan nobody would have gotten hurt in 9/11!"

The only way peace will ever occur is if Israel fully returns the entire west bank, with no conditions, makes east jerusalem the capital of the Palestinian state.
Then Israel must allow the palestinian state to effectivelly run its own economy.

Link?

Please try and keep the conspiracy theories to a minimum. The situation is confusing enough as it is.
www.msnbc.com front page

AP

Check them out.

Hezbollah is trying to transfer the Jewish soldiers to Iran.

Regardless of their motivation, they still voted for a party that has made it clear that their agenda is to destroy Israel. They knew what they were doing. Whether that was the primary reason or not, they still did it with knowledge of what they were doing

No, the palestinians wanted a normal chance at life, Hamas' main election policies was to stamp out corruption, and encourage economic development.
Besides, Hamas isn't just a resistance movement, it runs social services, such as hospitals, schools, etc.

I dont understand why everyone is complaining, previously Fatah was in power, and they to have a militant wing. If they got re-elected, I highly doubt they would have been critised.

The only way peace will ever occur is if Israel fully returns the entire west bank, with no conditions, makes east jerusalem the capital of the Palestinian state.
Then Israel must allow the palestinian state to effectivelly run its own economy.

That wont stop a god damned thing. The lie of "they just want their own land!" has been exposed again and again. The only thing that will stop this conflict is if these terrorist organizations fulfil their goal of destroying Israel, or Israel wipes them off the planet.

Whether the palestinians voted Hamas because of its stance on Israel or the fact that it is a terrorist organization is a moot point, the point is, they did vote a terrorist organization with the stated goal of annihalating Israel to power. I also said that many Palestinians want peace, so you only proved me right on both points. However, the Palestinians still stood aside while Hamas launched rocket after rocket into Israel. As for Fatah, Fatah isn't seeking to rekindle war with Israel or to annihalate it, so no, there wouldn't have been a fuss.

No, the palestinians wanted a normal chance at life, Hamas' main election policies was to stamp out corruption, and encourage economic development.
Besides, Hamas isn't just a resistance movement, it runs social services, such as hospitals, schools, etc.

I dont understand why everyone is complaining, previously Fatah was in power, and they to have a militant wing. If they got re-elected, I highly doubt they would have been critised.

Dude, you triple posted. Not even I'm that good.

The only thing that will stop this conflict is if these terrorist organizations fulfil their goal of destroying Israel, or Israel wipes them off the planet.

The palestinian struggle is simply to retrieve the land that was illegally taken of them

The palestinian struggle is simply to retrieve the land that was illegally taken of them

illegally taken from them by whom? Britain, who legally controlled it, or Israel, who was legally given that land by Britain?

There was never a "nation of Palestine", they never OWNED that land. It went from legal possession by Britain, and from Britain to the legal posession of Israel. Palestine was OFFERED land in 1948, they refused.

Nothing can be "illegally taken" from a group that NEVER OWNED IT.

Moreover, Hamas has not made it their goal to "get a Palestinian state" or to "recover land". They have made it their goal to DESTROY ISRAEL. Period. That's their goal, that's their mantra, that's their publically stated purpose. To destroy israel.

moreover Hezbollah isn't palestinian, they're lebanese, which makes the conversation of Hamas rather off topic.

However, the Palestinians still stood aside while Hamas launched rocket after rocket into Israel.

Hamas never in fact fired rockets until Israeli aggression began a number of weeks back. OTher groups fired those rockets, as Hamas was still abiding by the truce set with Israel.

I don't think Isreal should actually try anything, since when you look at from their prespective we are in the same boat as they are.

We're not. Were you aware that a Lebanese missile was fired into Haifa (a major (and reportedly quite beautiful) Israeli city)? And scores of other missles launched into various other places. We are not in the same boat. I have never in my life been to an ordinary restaurant that had to have guards at the door to keep out suicide bombers. I've never seen metal detectors at a mall before, and I've never had to worry that riding on a bus could bet me blown up. We are not in the same boat. We may be occassionally threatened by terrorism, but every day they have to undergo it. We may be at risk, but they are in danger.

If it was to take land they had then why didn't they stop when they got Gaza back, and when kadima was elected with the premise of handing over large areas of the west bank? Instead, they continued to attack Israel, so tell me, how is that simply trying to regain land taken from them?

The only way peace will ever occur is if Israel fully returns the entire west bank, with no conditions, makes east jerusalem the capital of the Palestinian state.
Then Israel must allow the palestinian state to effectivelly run its own economy.

They already tried. In case you didn't notice, granting independance to Gaza was a test. If the ceasefire held, then the test would be a success. The prize for a success would be granting independance to the entire West Bank. Unfortunately, the test failed. The ceasefire didn't hold, and it's come back down to re-entering Gaza. Had Hamas (the current by-far majority party of the Palestinian parliament) simply refrained from attacking Israel, Palestine would have gotten everything it desired. But they stayed committed to their vow to destroy Israel. So they attacked. Israel had no choice but to respond. This is what happened.

Hezbollah is trying to transfer the Jewish soldiers to Iran.
Well, strictly speaking, the Israelis are just saying that, and the other side is denying it. So you can't put it down as a fact.
Israel said its attacks were to prevent the movement of the captured soldiers and hamper Hezbollah’s military capacity. It said it had information Hezbollah was trying to take the two soldiers to its ally, Iran.

“We have concerns that they could be taken out of Lebanon to Iran. Those concerns have a basis,” said Foreign Ministry spokesman Mark Regev. He did not disclose the source of his information.

Iran’s Foreign Ministry denied the allegations. “I strongly deny such reports,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said. “Because of its desperation and increasing isolation in the world and because of the tension and crisis created inside Israel, it is now talking absurdities.”

Make of that what you will. I look at a map and I see that they'd have to pass through Syria, Iraq or Turkey to get to Iran. And somehow I don't see them getting through Iraq or Turkey without trouble.

illegally taken from them by whom? Britain, who legally controlled it, or Israel, who was legally given that land by Britain?

There was never a "nation of Palestine", they never OWNED that land. It went from legal possession by Britain, and from Britain to the legal posession of Israel. Palestine was OFFERED land in 1948, they refused.

Nothing can be "illegally taken" from a group that NEVER OWNED IT.

Moreover, Hamas has not made it their goal to "get a Palestinian state" or to "recover land". They have made it their goal to DESTROY ISRAEL. Period. That's their goal, that's their mantra, that's their publically stated purpose. To destroy israel.

The palestinians lived there, the Israelis drove the British out with terrorist attacks, hence allowing Israel to take over the land.

My garndparents own home, which they spent a life time building, was taken in one day. Simply occupied by zionist invaders. Are you telling me that my granparents never owned that house?

They already tried. In case you didn't notice, granting independance to Gaza was a test. If the ceasefire held, then the test would be a success. The prize for a success would be granting independance to the entire West Bank. Unfortunately, the test failed. The ceasefire didn't hold, and it's come back down to re-entering Gaza. Had Hamas (the current by-far majority party of the Palestinian parliament) simply refrained from attacking Israel, Palestine would have gotten everything it desired. But they stayed committed to their vow to destroy Israel. So they attacked. Israel had no choice but to respond. This is what happened.

This is not what happened. This is a response to to Hezbollah in Lebanon, not Hamas in the West Bank.

That said I agree with you, the fallacy that Palestine will stop their attacks when Israel gives them a Palestinian state has been exposed as a fallacy, it is time the world realize that Hamas wants only the destruction of Israel, nothing more.

The palestinians lived there, the Israelis drove the British out with terrorist attacks, hence allowing Israel to take over the land.

My garndparents own home, which they spent a life time building, was taken in one day. Simply occupied by zionist invaders. Are you telling me that my granparents never owned that house?

They lived on colonial land. That colony was given to Israel. Tragic, sure, but don't call it illegal, there was nothing illegal about it. It was british land, they gave it to Israel. Nothing was illegally taken.

They already tried. In case you didn't notice, granting independance to Gaza was a test.

They gave them gaza back, then reclaimed more land in the west bank by building more settlements, and building the wall.
I dont understand how this is meant to work?

They gave them gaza back, then reclaimed more land in the west bank by building more settlements, and building the wall.
I dont understand how this is meant to work?

They didn't "reclaim" more land. They had claimed it from before. Gaza was a test of independance. They failed.

They lived on colonial land. That colony was given to Israel. Tragic, sure, but don't call it illegal, there was nothing illegal about it. It was british land, they gave it to Israel. Nothing was illegally taken.

The colony was originaly meant to be shared between the palestinian arabs, and the jews which already lived there. Sure, it wouldnt have been an issue if the Jews simply migrated, and bought land, and lived like normal citizens, but to come and take the livellyhood of innocent people simply isn't right.
Sure it was british land, but when the region started getting violent, and the british were being attacked by the jews, they decided to leave, and hence the jews then took over.

The colony was originaly meant to be shared between the palestinian arabs, and the jews

Correct. And in 1948 the Palestinians were offered part of the land. They refused.

I look at a map and I see that they'd have to pass through Syria, Iraq or Turkey to get to Iran. And somehow I don't see them getting through Iraq or Turkey without trouble.

Just a reminder: The Syrian government workers hand-in-hand with the Lebanese government, so that won't be a problem. Additionally, the two of them are close allies of Iran. Keep in mind for a moment that Israel has the best spy force in the world (yes, better than the CIA). Not saying how they knew that the kidnapped soldiers are being transported to Iran is an indicator that they got the information from their spy force. Additionally, it is extremely clear by the military targets that they definitely beleive this information. Incidentally, it would not be didfficult to get the soldiers to Iran; you use airplanes. That's why the Israelis have been attacking Hezbollah-controlled airports.

Everyone is complaining about international law against Palestine, which, to date, has yet to become a legitimately recognized state. Israel is doing exactly what Hezbollah, Hamas, and everyone else would be doing if it were the other way around. I hope they pummel their enemies, get their soldiers back, and this whole thing ends. Countries and organizations have yet to learn that Israel has no regard for international law, and rightfully so, and will do what it feels is in its best interest each and every time therefore to mess with a foe of such a caliber, you deserve what you get in return. Shame on Syria and Iran for supporting Hamas & Hezbollah. If we're going to point fingers, let's point them at everyone. :: Waits for "Shame on US for supporting Israel comment to retort with Shame on Arab World for supporting Palestine ::

Roughly 1/5 of the properly democratically elected members of the Lebanese parliament are part Hesbollah. I don't buy this "Lebanon can't control Hesbollah!" argument, Hesbollah is part of their nice and proper democracy.
Yes, a few members of parliament have some sort of position in the political wing of Hezbollah.
Does that mean that the parliament controls the military arm of Hezbollah? Hardly.

The problem is that disarming Hezbollah wouldn't be simply disarming a militant group, it would be a statement about ethnic groups in Lebanon. And the country isn't ready for that yet, it's still too unstable. And instead of a democratic, decent Arab country which was developing there, we'll have more chaos, death and ruin.

Well, at least then various bigots will still be able to run around claiming "Arabs and democracy doesn't work!" :rolleyes:

Which only goes to prove my point. Given a nice proper democray, the people of Lebanon, under their own free will, elect members of a terrorist organization to more than 20% of the seats of their government.
Your world is a little too black & white for my liking, dude.

Incidentally, it would not be didfficult to get the soldiers to Iran; you use airplanes. That's why the Israelis have been attacking Hezbollah-controlled airports.
Don't be silly. Together with the Yanks they could easily stop any plane trying to fly over.

They're not attacking the airports to stop anyone, they're bombing infrastructure to set back Lebanon a few years and to destroy Hezbollah. The latter I could live with, the former is crap.

They gave them gaza back, then reclaimed more land in the west bank by building more settlements, and building the wall.
I dont understand how this is meant to work?

They didn't claim the land. They already had the land. Additionally, they haven't built any new settlements there in years, and the wall is to create a buffer zone. But why would anyone create a buffer zone against land they already control? Because they're not planning on controlling it for long. They were planning to make it part of Palestine, like I said.

It would be like if, my neighbor's driveway was damaged to to leakage from a water main. He has a Hummer and a Camry. I offered him part of my driveway to store his Hummer, but then I noticed that with his car parked next to mine, there would be no room to open the doors, and a single inch off in either dirrection would be tearing off the mirrors. As such, I had to shorten his new parking spot to accomodate only his Camry, but this time with room on both sides. What you are saying is that I tried to steal land from my neighbor. I'm the one giving it to him in the first place.

The palestinian struggle is simply to retrieve the land that was illegally taken of them

Wasn't that what Hezbollah said up till it actually got it?

Funny thing... they're still around.

Don't be silly. Together with the Yanks they could easily stop any plane trying to fly over.

They're not attacking the airports to stop anyone, they're bombing infrastructure to set back Lebanon a few years and to destroy Hezbollah. The latter I could live with, the former is crap.

Actually, they are attacking Hezbollah-controlled airports to stop any flights from taking off into Iran. Addtionally, the Americans aren't going to get involved unless Israel starts to look like its actually going to lose. In other words, they won't enter until the eleventh hour when it becomes a life or death situation. Not to mention the fact that fighting down planes would be virtually logistically impossible- how would you know which planes came from Lebanon? Not to mention that you would then have to take the fighting into Syria. Great move there; add another enemy! As you can see, they have to stop the planes from taking off the ground, or they lose the soldiers forever.

Additionally, they haven't built any new settlements there in years, and the wall is to create a buffer zone

1- The wall has actually taken land off a number of palestinian farmers.
2- The wall has surrounded whole towns, disallowing them to develop economically.
3- Israel has dismantled a number of small settlements in the west bank, but they are expanding others, in turn effectivelly surrounding the entire east jerusalem with Israeli settlements.

I fully support Israel. I love that place. Go Israel. Israel don't take s**t from anybody.

Yes, a few members of parliament have some sort of position in the political wing of Hezbollah.
Does that mean that the parliament controls the military arm of Hezbollah? Hardly.

The problem is that disarming Hezbollah wouldn't be simply disarming a militant group, it would be a statement about ethnic groups in Lebanon. And the country isn't ready for that yet, it's still too unstable. And instead of a democratic, decent Arab country which was developing there, we'll have more chaos, death and ruin.

Well, at least then various bigots will still be able to run around claiming "Arabs and democracy doesn't work!" :rolleyes:


Your world is a little too black & white for my liking, dude.

It is black and white. They chose to elect terrorists. Period. End of story. They voted for terrorists who were engaging in attacks against a far superior military. They chose not to halt those attacks. Would dismantling Hezbollah been difficult? Sure it would have. And they made the choice not to do it.

They chose to let Hezbollah be. They chose to suffer the concequences of that choice.

-snip-

Andrew Jackson did this in the American Civil war (or the war between the states if you are from south of the mason dixon line) by burning everything on his way to atlanta, did it work?

-snip-

Sorry for such a long post for my first one, but I had to pipe up here.

You know, I do think using a zombie general who had died in 1845 would have been an excellent move, but I seriously doubt Old Hickory would have fought for the union, having been born in South Carolina...

And that wasn't long by any stretch.

You know, I do think using a zombie general who had died in 1845 would have been an excellent move, but I seriously doubt Old Hickory would have fought for the union, having been born in South Carolina...

And that wasn't long by any stretch.

Zombie Jackson, you've just won the civil war, what are you going to do now?

Brains.....BRAAAAAAAAIIIINS!

Not to mention the fact that fighting down planes would be virtually logistically impossible- how would you know which planes came from Lebanon?
http://www.iai.co.il/Default.aspx?docID=27136&FolderID=17660&lang=en
This'll do the trick.

Not to mention that you would then have to take the fighting into Syria. Great move there; add another enemy!
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/4AC3B02A-4F36-4AD6-BDA4-3D7214E63979.htm
Been there, done that, got the T-Shirt.

It is black and white. They chose to elect terrorists. Period. End of story. They voted for terrorists who were engaging in attacks against a far superior military.
I'm thinking you didn't do enough research.

a) Hezbollah as a political party isn't the same as Hezbollah's military wing. The EU recognises as much by declaring the military wing a terror organisation, but not the party.

b) If you had watched the news back during the election campaign, you would've seen that Hezbollah's main message was about countering the anti-Syrian rhetoric and policies of everyone else. Israel didn't enter the debate.

c) Back then Hezbollah wasn't attacking anyone. They only really attacked now when Israel marched into Gaza, presumably to open a second front. And by the way, I consider firing unguided missiles into Israel terrorism, but not the capture of soldiers. And if you look, previously to this Hezbollah has occasionally fought the IDF, but stayed away from civilians for many years.

1- The wall has actually taken land off a number of palestinian farmers.
2- The wall has surrounded whole towns, disallowing them to develop economically.
3- Israel has dismantled a number of small settlements in the west bank, but they are expanding others, in turn effectivelly surrounding the entire east jerusalem with Israeli settlements.

1. No, it hasn't, because they were never required to leave. The get to keep the land, it's just that now that that land has been annexed, they get to vote as well. They are no longer in occupied territory; they now have the rights of Israelis. Israel is a parliamentery democracy. There are many Palestinians in Israel, and all of them are considered ordinary citizens, get to vote like ordinary citizens, and even run for political office like ordinary citizens. Most Palestinians living in Israel actually like living in Israel.

2. Actually, this helps them to develop economically, because now they are part of a first-world country eith the full resources and economic policies of a first-world country. Now they finally can develop economically.

3. Jerusalem is the capital and largest city of Israel. London is the capital and largest city in the U.K, and, up until recently, it has had unhampered expansion for millenia. Why shouldn't Jerusalem? The Palestinians in those areas (which, by the way, had already been annexed to Israel long before this) are now, as you said, living in suburbs of a major city. Good for them! Now their towns can finally develop!

you are just mad that israel does not play the grab ass game of keeping a public image and actually gets the job done.

this should have been done many many years ago. Im glad to see Israel is finally doing this and stopped being held back by talks of other countries

Israeli soldiers were attacked by a military organization based in Lebanon. As has been stated, that is an act of war. If the United States were to send troops into Mexico, kill several soldiers, and take two back with us as prisoners, how do you think the international community would respond?

Civilian casualties are a terrible thing, but I seriously doubt there's been a war in the history of the world where there haven't been any. Israel's intent by invading is not to cause civilian casualties. The intent of Arab terrorists is to wipe out every Israeli. I think there's a difference there, anybody agree?

The argument that the nation of Israel has no right to exist because of its origins is simply false. By that argument, what countries do have the right to exist? Certainly not the United States. I mean, we stole this land from Britain, and heck, between us, them, Spain, Portugal, and all the other colonial powers, we stole two entire continents from the native people. Let's pack up and go back to Europe. While we're at it, let's expel the Arabs from the Mediterranian coast, since they stole that from the Byzantines, who inherited it from the Romans, who stole it from the various people who lived there before, including the Babylonians, who don't really exist anymore, and the Sumerians, who don't really exist anymore, and the Hittites, who aren't exactly a member of today's international community, and the Jews, who still do exist. Oh wait, that would kind of defeat the purpose, wouldn't it? Let's face it, any attempt to give everything back to the original owners is guaranteed to fail, since there was always somebody there before somebody else. Just about every nation on Earth was established by taking land from somebody else. Israel was legally given its land. I don't see why they are to be criticized for that, unless you plan on criticizing everybody else.

And to whoever had the idea of just moving everybody out and nuking the whole place, you're not the first.

a) Hezbollah as a political party isn't the same as Hezbollah's military wing. The EU recognises as much by declaring the military wing a terror organisation, but not the party.

Help me to understand why anyone should tolerate a political party that insists on having a militant wing that recieves the support of such auspicious and peaceloving nations as Iran and Syria?

Zombie Jackson, you've just won the civil war, what are you going to do now?

Brains.....BRAAAAAAAAIIIINS!

Just imagine how the war would have turned out...

:::sings:::

In 1865 we took a little trip
Along with Zombie Jackson up the mighty Potomac.
We took a little bacon and we took a little beans
And we caught the bloody Union in the town of Washington.

The israeli attack on the Beirut airport and its blockade of lebanese ports is despicable.

Collective punishment is always despicable and is a profound and shameful disgrace to whichever country makes it a policy.

For 1 good luck going against Isreal since the U.S. backs them.
For 2 Lebanon called for it since they didn't release captured soldiers.

Help me to understand why anyone should tolerate a political party that insists on having a militant wing that recieves the support of such auspicious and peaceloving nations as Iran and Syria?
:rolleyes:

So anything that involves Iran and Syria is terrorism and must be destroyed?

Hezbollah was started as a militia for the Shi'ites in Lebanon. Similar militias existed and still exist for the Sunnis, the Christians and the Druze in Lebanon. During the civil war Hezbollah was one party in the conflict, and it was then that they committed their worst act of terrorism, which was the bombing of US Military.

Israel also got involved in that conflict, to hunt down the PLO which was based in Lebanon. This didn't sit well with Hezbollah at all, and their close relationship with groups like the PLO only intensified this dislike for Israel.

Nonetheless, after the civil war Hezbollah was the primary representation for the Shi'ites in Lebanon. They branched into many civilian areas, building roads, schools and so on. They also started to get involved in the political process. Their biggest success came in the last elections, when they ran on a pro-Syrian platform and got support of most of the Shia population. Support for them in other parts of the country was obviously rather slim.

Today Hezbollah is a political party, a community support network, runs a TV-station and that sort of thing, and has a militia that occasionally has exchanged fire with the IDF.

Saying that the Lebanese voted for terrorists is ridiculously oversimplified and you end up with the black and white world view I was talking about before.

Ergo: Fight Hezbollah? Fine. Bomb the shit out of Lebanon? Not fine.

I'm thinking you didn't do enough research.

a) Hezbollah as a political party isn't the same as Hezbollah's military wing. The EU recognises as much by declaring the military wing a terror organisation, but not the party.

b) If you had watched the news back during the election campaign, you would've seen that Hezbollah's main message was about countering the anti-Syrian rhetoric and policies of everyone else. Israel didn't enter the debate.

c) Back then Hezbollah wasn't attacking anyone. They only really attacked now when Israel marched into Gaza, presumably to open a second front. And by the way, I consider firing unguided missiles into Israel terrorism, but not the capture of soldiers. And if you look, previously to this Hezbollah has occasionally fought the IDF, but stayed away from civilians for many years.

a) A political party with a military branch. Does this strike you as not even a little bit...odd? Imagine if tomorrow the Republican Party suddenly, and privately, starting arming civilians, building tanks, and lobbing missles into Mexico. This private army was endorced, advocated for, and funded, by high ranking Republicans in the government including George Bush and Bill Frist. Yet some how these concept are...seperate? No, bullshit. Hezbollah is Hezbollah. Lebanon elected members of a terrorist group to their government.

b) Counting anti syrian rhetoric eh? You mean advocating positivly for a nation that has publicly, and loudly decried the existance of Israel and, just by the way, is funding them? Let's not speak ill of the country that is giving us money to fight our common enemy of Israel...that's not at all the same as speaking against Israel, not at all. Or, to consider the analogy of the US, would you find it a bit...odd if a major American political party ran on a platform in "Go Canada!" ?

c) Yes, they attacked Israel for moving Israeli troops through Israeli land. That's not terrorist activities at all...as for them "not really attacking anything":

In 2001 Jordan arrested three Hezbollah members attempting to smuggle Katyusha rockets into the West Bank

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

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

On February 9, 2005 Palestinian Authority officials blamed Hezbollah of attempting to derail the recent truce between Israel and Palestine by offering increased funding and bonuses to the militant cells it operates in Israel for any attack they carry out

Nope, not attacking ANYBODY were they?

:rolleyes:

So anything that involves Iran and Syria is terrorism and must be destroyed?

Hezbollah was started as a militia for the Shi'ites in Lebanon. Similar militias existed and still exist for the Sunnis, the Christians and the Druze in Lebanon. During the civil war Hezbollah was one party in the conflict, and it was then that they committed their worst act of terrorism, which was the bombing of US Military.

Israel also got involved in that conflict, to hunt down the PLO which was based in Lebanon. This didn't sit well with Hezbollah at all, and their close relationship with groups like the PLO only intensified this dislike for Israel.

Nonetheless, after the civil war Hezbollah was the primary representation for the Shi'ites in Lebanon. They branched into many civilian areas, building roads, schools and so on. They also started to get involved in the political process. Their biggest success came in the last elections, when they ran on a pro-Syrian platform and got support of most of the Shia population. Support for them in other parts of the country was obviously rather slim.

Today Hezbollah is a political party, a community support network, runs a TV-station and that sort of thing, and has a militia that occasionally has exchanged fire with the IDF.

Saying that the Lebanese voted for terrorists is ridiculously oversimplified and you end up with the black and white world view I was talking about before.

Ergo: Fight Hezbollah? Fine. Bomb the shit out of Lebanon? Not fine.

This great and wonderful political party still maintained their militia, still carried out terrorist acts against Israel after the withdrawl.

Let me repeat that. No matter what Hezbollah has done, no matter what they accomplished, the fact remains they still CHOSE to REAMIN ARMED. They still CHOSE to continue acts of terrorism. They still CHOSE to attack Israel. No matter what Hezbollah as a political party has accomplished they still chose to keep their arms and attack israel.

No matter how well you talk about the accomplishments of Hezbollah, and I'm sure there are many, the fact is they chose to reimain armed. And a terrorist, no matter how many schools and roads he builds,is still a terrorist. By refusing to disarm and refusing to stop the aggression against Israel Hezbollah chose to remain a terrorist organization. And the people of Lebanon chose to elect them.

a) A political party with a military branch. Does this strike you as not even a little bit...odd?
Not if you consider where they came from. Tell me, what was Ben Gurion's second job?

You mean advocating positivly for a nation that has publicly, and loudly decried the existance of Israel and, just by the way, is funding them?
Yes. Syria. The country with arguably the closest links to Lebanon.
By the way, when will the Fifties end for you?

Syria has recognised Israel's existence, signed multiple agreements and treaties with the country and has been pushing diplomatically for a settlement, based on passed UN resolutions.

c) Yes, they attacked Israel for moving Israeli troops through Israeli land. That's not terrorist activities at all...as for them "not really attacking anything"
Okay, so the IDF argues that Hezbollah may have been involved. Just as I told Designated Marksman before, that doesn't make it fact.
Compared to real terror groups like the Al-Aqsa Martyrs, Islamic Jihad or Hamas, they've been very well-behaved.

And the people of Lebanon chose to elect them.
Notice how before this sentence you have basically completely ignored what I was saying?

I'm not disputing that Hezbollah's military wing is a terrorist organisation.

I'm saying that given the history of the movement, most Shi'ites (again, since you chose to ignore it before - non-Shi'ites didn't vote for Hezbollah) didn't vote for a terrorist organisation, they voted for the biggest and most well-established community network in their neighbourhood. It's a matter of intention.

Not if you consider where they came from. Tell me, what was Ben Gurion's second job?


Yes. Syria. The country with arguably the closest links to Lebanon.
By the way, when will the Fifties end for you?

Syria has recognised Israel's existence, signed multiple agreements and treaties with the country and has been pushing diplomatically for a settlement, based on passed UN resolutions.


Okay, so the IDF argues that Hezbollah may have been involved. Just as I told Designated Marksman before, that doesn't make it fact.
Compared to real terror groups like the Al-Aqsa Martyrs, Islamic Jihad or Hamas, they've been very well-behaved.

Sending 14 year old girls and capturing soldiers is well behaved?

Can't pick and chose here, either they are terrorists, and the capture of those soldiers was a terrorist act OR they are a legitimate military force, in which case taking soldiers hostage is an act of war. Either way, aggressive acts open the door for retaliation.

And besides, I've said before, only 50 Lebanese have died, this is not the massive carpet bombing of beirut that it's being made out to be.

Sending 14 year old girls and capturing soldiers is well behaved?
The 14-year old girl thing was an allegation that I have not seen proven. That was Palestinian terror groups.
Capturing soldiers - did I excuse that? Or justify it? It was an obvious attempt to open a second front to relieve pressure from the Gaza Strip. And it worked. Certainly an act of war, but not by the Lebanese government or people.

Either way, aggressive acts open the door for retaliation.
Finally we're talking.
Except that you think retaliation apparently must be about destroying vital infrastructure in a country that is on the way to becoming one of the most open and free societies in the Arab world, and potentially a good friend of Israel.
I think retaliation would be quite possible without collective punishment, concentrating on Hezbollah alone, perhaps working together with the Lebanese government to create the pressure to disarm or disappear.

And besides, I've said before, only 50 Lebanese have died, this is not the massive carpet bombing of beirut that it's being made out to be.
Hey, it's plenty more than Israelis got killed by Hezbollah in what...five years? Ten?

EDIT: Found this little gem.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5176582.stm
I think Hezbollah's action are completely out of line. They are acting independently of the Lebanese government and have no right to incite this violence against Israel.

Initially, I thought Israel's reactions in destroying Hezbollah positions and escape routes were appropriate. But the killing of civilians and the bombing of civilian installations, including the airport, is completely unjustified and excessive.
When the situation gets tough between Israel and the Palestinians, we pay the price. We pay for all the mishaps and bad policies in the Middle East.

This country is carrying the pains of the entire Arab world.

Worse still, it looks like a group of people are getting their commands from outside the country. We have a president who is fully behind Hezbollah, a puppet for Syria.

We knew there would be skirmishes down south, but we didn't know how far the situation would escalate and we don't know what more could come.
If I were acting for Hezbollah, I would not have kidnapped those two soldiers. But it's done now and it would be counter-productive for us Lebanese to speak up against it.

We are now in a position of war. Nothing more can be done. But I don't think this is turning the Lebanese against Hezbollah in any way.

Many would say that Israel has reacted harshly because they were just waiting for an excuse for a harsh act. Some say the Lebanese government is trying to prove how tough it is without having a real strategy.

The Lebanese have been getting a raw deal from both the Arabs and Israel for a long time. They let the Palestinians use it as base of attack and knew how that sort of thing worked out the last few times they allowed it.

The Israeli's sent professional soldiers and the Arabs threw money and suicidals at them.

I prey in my own silly atheist way every night that the US withdraws it's support for Israel and it's mindless agression. In that action, we would see the relaesing of the hounds as every arab/persian nation launched every missile it had at that prick of a country. If they managed to survive, I'd imagine that Israel would be much more interested in going to the negotiation table than they hae been for the last 50 years.

Israel would undoubtedly win, even if it might have to go nuclear, in which case there'd probably be millions dead. Ever wonder what would happen if the Israeli air force tagged the Aswan High Dam in Egypt with a KT range nuclear warhead?

I'm betting nothing good.

Personally, I know I support Israel's actions 100%, to the point when the crisis first started, I greeted a friend on AIM with. "Good news, Israel just invaded Gaza. ^.^ "

Finally, the Palestinians and neighboring countries are being put in their place.

and the worse part is the reason this whole hate of isreal started is because we took land that we won back for the muslims from nazi germany and gave a little strip of it so that the jewish people had a home to escape persecution on the scale of ww2 ever again. We fought the nazis so that they would be free again and then they crap on us like this


edit: I didnt read all of the posts, I just put my general idea of the situation

You haven't read just the post, you haven't read any history, as I see. Who take land for the arabs from germany? And Hitler never had too much interest on muslim, having the jews to hate blindly, so they never were menaced by hitler, directly, of course he was a danger for the entire world.

Israel would undoubtedly win, even if it might have to go nuclear, in which case there'd probably be millions dead. Ever wonder what would happen if the Israeli air force tagged the Aswan High Dam in Egypt with a KT range nuclear warhead?

I'm betting nothing good.

Personally, I know I support Israel's actions 100%, to the point when the crisis first started, I greeted a friend on AIM with. "Good news, Israel just invaded Gaza. ^.^ "

Finally, the Palestinians and neighboring countries are being put in their place.

This is proof that Israel has degenerated from a homeland for an oppressed people into an opppressor itself, running free on the blank check protection given by Uncle Sam.

The veto of the UN Resolution which blames both sides (not just Israel) for the conflict is just the latest example of geopolitical welfare the United States is heaping on Israel, in effect encouraging them to be complete assholes with impunity.

Ah, what is "their place"? Would you cream in your pants if Muslims were classified as subhuman and ghettoized (bet the irony'll be missed) as servants of Israel and the United States?

Ever wonder what would happen if the Israeli air force tagged the Aswan High Dam in Egypt with a KT range nuclear warhead?


Russia or China would "accidently" misplace a MT nuclear device which will find it's way to Tel Aviv or so.

Israel going on a full out aggression to all the others states would mean Iran is also probably on the hit list. Something that neither Russia nor China would care for since they get vital resources from there.

And using nuclear devices as weapons ever again will definitely open the door for similar events by all major actors.

But hey, Israel will get put in it's place. Just like how you want all the other countries put in their place.

Ghandi was describing the cause they were fighting for, not the tatics they use

Using any kind of weaponary to instill fear into the civilian population of a country to force political pressure on the government is terrorism.

Terrorism is sharply distinguised from freedom fighting because freedom fighting involves attcking the armies of those who opress you, not the civilians of that armies country.

Terrorisms sharp distinction occurs again with intention. Whilst some civilians will sometimes die as a result of targeting infrasturcure and millitary instalations, that is a long way from intentionally targeting civilian centres to kill as many civilians as you can to instill terror in the citizenry



So the American government is a terrorist organization by your definition. Or have you forgotten "Operation Shock and Awe"... Precision strikes on a populated city with cruise missiles... hah! That's like trying to precision strike an anthill with a well-aimed slingshot. You may hit it where you want to, but there's alot of collateral damage regardless. The US knew that, and did what they chose to do.

Eat bio cannon Israel! :gundge:

A major thing, in my mind at least, is that israel isn't even trying diplomacy anymore. Instead of at least sending a request to lebanon to help get the soldiers back, or do something, or let them do something, they just invade.

Its like if a canadian captured an american soldier(probably out on the town, near the border kidna thing), and instead of trying to get canada to try to find the guy, or allow the US to come in and look, the US came in and bombed the region, bombing anyone with similar politics to the canadian who captured the american.

Not a perfect analogy, but few analogies are perfect. If you don't believe lebanon could, or would do anything about it, fine. But Israel didn't even try, and that is what really gets me.

It's not collective punishment. It's called stopping the influx of weapons for Hezbollah, which is organized and paid for by Lebanon and Syria.

Besides, there are already other threads on this topic.

BTW, it's not despicable. Hezbollah and the Palestinians attacked first.

After that, anything is fair game.


THANK YOU!

THANK YOU!

Attacking fuel tanks and power generators isn't collective punishment? The hezbollah use these things no more than regular people.

That argument could be expanded into genocide, killing anyone and destroying anything because you can connect it to the terrorists in some vague way. Couldn't israel nuke beirut, and say "we wanted to take out all the terrorists in the city, we cant help that they live in a city with civilians"

Attacking fuel tanks and power generators isn't collective punishment? The hezbollah use these things no more than regular people.

That argument could be expanded into genocide, killing anyone and destroying anything because you can connect it to the terrorists in some vague way. Couldn't israel nuke beirut, and say "we wanted to take out all the terrorists in the city, we cant help that they live in a city with civilians"



Israel has blew a gasket, they seem to want to strike things that aid the terrorists. This whole thing didn't need to go this far. Was the men taken ever returned? I was sure one guy is dead, but the other one?

Hopefully Israel will wipe out a few more militants in the process of what its doing. I fully support their actions.
Hopefully the reverse is true.

Due largely to this and an explosion in Nigeria, oil just hit $78/barrel due to speculation on supply. :(

If things get worse, expect $100/barrel by the end of the month.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/5178866.stm

Due largely to this and an explosion in Nigeria, oil just hit $78/barrel due to speculation on supply. :(

If things get worse, expect $100/barrel by the end of the month.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/5178866.stm
how it effect? we had no oil, as well as lebanon and the palastinians.

how it effect? we had no oil, as well as lebanon and the palastinians.

I can lead a horse to a link, but I can't make him click. :rolleyes:

The israeli attack on the Beirut airport and its blockade of lebanese ports is despicable.

Collective punishment is always despicable and is a profound and shameful disgrace to whichever country makes it a policy.

I guess it also was really really bad of the Royal Navy to blocade the 3rd Reich, thus collectively punishing Jerry.

I guess it was really really bad of the RAF to collectively punish Jerry for bombing Berling.

I guess it was really really bad of the Royal Army to collectively punish the Waffen SS for deeds done by individual members.

I can lead a horse to a link, but I can't make him click. :rolleyes:I saw it,\.
they are always afraid from something. USA in iraq had much more to do with instability in the region, than local "war" between 1 nation and 2 terror organizations, none of them had oil in his possession.

Actually Lebanon and Israel at technically at war, still. Since 1948.

Help me to understand why anyone should tolerate a political party that insists on having a militant wing that recieves the support of such auspicious and peaceloving nations as Iran and Syria?

+

It is black and white. They chose to elect terrorists. Period. End of story. They voted for terrorists who were engaging in attacks against a far superior military. They chose not to halt those attacks. Would dismantling Hezbollah been difficult? Sure it would have. And they made the choice not to do it.

They chose to let Hezbollah be. They chose to suffer the concequences of that choice.

+

a) A political party with a military branch. Does this strike you as not even a little bit...odd?

+

This great and wonderful political party still maintained their militia, still carried out terrorist acts against Israel after the withdrawl.

Has no one heard of Sinn Fein before?
Did anyone see the British Army go apeshit and crash through the border into the Republic of Ireland after any IRA bombings?

NO!
Stop using "they voted for terrrrrishts. Reap the consequences" as an argument. It has been shown there is a different way of doing things. Get over how 'unique' the situation is for Israel. Its not, the thought reminds me of a fishbowl mentality that this kind of shit has never happened before elsewhere in the world.

You want to attack Hezb'allah? Fine. You lose sympathy and legitimacy as soon as you start bombing civilian infrastructure that has no connection to your stated goal.

+


+


+


Has no one heard of Sinn Fein before?
Did anyone see the British Army go apeshit and crash through the border into the Republic of Ireland after any IRA bombings?

NO!
Stop using "they voted for terrrrrishts. Reap the consequences" as an argument. It has been shown there is a different way of doing things. Get over how 'unique' the situation is for Israel. Its not, the thought reminds me of a fishbowl mentality that this kind of shit has never happened before elsewhere in the world.

You want to attack Hezb'allah? Fine. You lose sympathy and legitimacy as soon as you start bombing civilian infrastructure that has no connection to your stated goal.


Basically, what you are saying is that :
mr A should not be punished for the murder of mr B
because mr C did not get punished for the murder of mr D.

Basically, what you are saying is that :
mr A should not be punished for the murder of mr B
because mr C did not get punished for the murder of mr D.
No, I'm saying Mr. A should not get executed for the murder of Mr. B, because Mr. C has shown to be a valuable and productive member of society after Mr. C served his prison time for the murder of Mr. D, thereby showing there is an alternative method.

.... if you want to break it down to black v white that is. Which, shockingly, the world is not. So in the end your point is null and void.

No, I'm saying Mr. A should not get executed for the murder of Mr. B, because Mr. C has shown to be a valuable and productive member of society after Mr. C served his prison time for the murder of Mr. D, thereby showing there is an alternative method.

.... if you want to break it down to black v white that is. Which, shockingly, the world is not. So in the end your point is null and void.

I'm saying that mr A should die for his own sins.

And that the slightest tinge of relativism equates collaboration.

Shockingly, the world is B/W

I'm saying that mr A should die for his own sins.
Well, that's your opinion. I've shown you an example of when another way actually works.

And that the slightest tinge of relativism equates collaboration.
Riiight.

Shockingly, the world is B/W
Nah, its really not. But we could spend all day here like in a panto going "is", "isn't", "is", "isn't, "is", isn't" and so forth.

I guess it also was really really bad of the Royal Navy to blocade the 3rd Reich, thus collectively punishing Jerry.

I guess it was really really bad of the RAF to collectively punish Jerry for bombing Berling.

I guess it was really really bad of the Royal Army to collectively punish the Waffen SS for deeds done by individual members.
Yes, it was. What was your point?

I have no sympathy for Palestine.
That is all.

I have no sympathy for Palestine.
That is all.
And I have absolutely none for Israel any more. At all. Whatsoever.

And by extention, none for the US who vetoed a UN decision to make Israel end hostilities.

And I have absolutely none for Israel any more. At all. Whatsoever.

And by extention, none for the US who vetoed a UN decision to make Israel end hostilities.

You forget Israel did not start all this.......:headbang: :headbang: :headbang:

You forget Israel did not start all this.......:headbang: :headbang: :headbang:
That bears no relation on whether it was right or wrong to blow up Gaza's bridges, power stations and other infrastructure, and then invade and make some settlements there.

The fact that Israel is also about to bomb Lebanon is also not winning them any favours. The Lebanese that captured the two soldiers also did no wrong at all. The Israelis were invaders, and they captured them. That is the end of it.

Hopefully the Israelis won't bomb the whole of Lebanon (ordering all civilians to hide away from the areas that Hezbollah operates - as in the whole of Lebanon, basically doesn't fill me with confidence), but if they do, Ehud Olmert and the top Israeli generals need to be sent to Den Haag for war crimes.

I guess it also was really really bad of the Royal Navy to blocade the 3rd Reich, thus collectively punishing Jerry.

I guess it was really really bad of the RAF to collectively punish Jerry for bombing Berling.

I guess it was really really bad of the Royal Army to collectively punish the Waffen SS for deeds done by individual members.
I guess apples and oranges come from the same tree.

They lived on colonial land. That colony was given to Israel. Tragic, sure, but don't call it illegal, there was nothing illegal about it. It was british land, they gave it to Israel. Nothing was illegally taken.

It was not 'British land', it was a "classs A" mandate of the league of nations in which political power was given to the British until independence. The Palestinian people owned over 90% of the land, the settlers 7%. It was illegally seized and the people dispoessesed.

That bears no relation on whether it was right or wrong to blow up Gaza's bridges, power stations and other infrastructure, and then invade and make some settlements there.

The fact that Israel is also about to bomb Lebanon is also not winning them any favours. The Lebanese that captured the two soldiers also did no wrong at all. The Israelis were invaders, and they captured them. That is the end of it.

Hopefully the Israelis won't bomb the whole of Lebanon (ordering all civilians to hide away from the areas that Hezbollah operates - as in the whole of Lebanon, basically doesn't fill me with confidence), but if they do, Ehud Olmert and the top Israeli generals need to be sent to Den Haag for war crimes.


Yes it does. They are hiding in the Gaza, launching attacks from lebanon, being harbored by the Lebanese government, it make perfact miliatary sence to cut them off, turn off the lights, distroy the ability of the Lebonese militaries ability to counter attack (just in case they would).In a military action the point to to remove the opposing forces ability to counter attack and force them on the defencive, keep pushing untill the enamy have NO ability to strike back. And that is just what they are doing. Fact of the matter is if the terrorists were not opperating in lebanon, then they would not have been attacked.

Yes it does. They are hiding in the Gaza, launching attacks from lebanon, being harbored by the Lebanese government, it make perfact miliatary sence to cut them off, turn off the lights, distroy the ability of the Lebonese militaries ability to counter attack (just in case they would).In a military action the point to to remove the opposing forces ability to counter attack and force them on the defencive, keep pushing untill the enamy have NO ability to strike back. And that is just what they are doing. Fact of the matter is if the terrorists were not opperating in lebanon, then they would not have been attacked.
I would think the excessive show of force vs the people of Lebanon to "stop terrorists" would and should draw official militaries into the fight.

Israel's action against Lebanon can only serve to garner suppot for Hezbollah. Lebanon was already in financial trouble with a barely stable democratic government. Israel destroys their tourist season and damage tons of infrastructure as well as killing civilians. The next election will see Hizbollah members fill 70+% of the government of Lebanon.

Israel has all the right to attack, they have been pushed around by people who should be shot for too long. They are flaming pissed, and they are now going to show all the militants what happens when you mess with them. I say, go Israel! Kick some terrorist ass.

Yes it does. They are hiding in the Gaza, launching attacks from lebanon, being harbored by the Lebanese government, it make perfact miliatary sence to cut them off, turn off the lights, distroy the ability of the Lebonese militaries ability to counter attack (just in case they would).In a military action the point to to remove the opposing forces ability to counter attack and force them on the defencive, keep pushing untill the enamy have NO ability to strike back. And that is just what they are doing. Fact of the matter is if the terrorists were not opperating in lebanon, then they would not have been attacked.
May I add, that Yootopia should also accuse the terrorists of war crimes.

Also, war crimes, what the hell is that? How can someone actually commit a crime in war? ITS WAR! Its not some pussy slap-fight, its guns, tanks, bombs, death, and destruction. People are going to die.

Israel has all the right to attack, they have been pushed around by people who should be shot for too long. They are flaming pissed, and they are now going to show all the militants what happens when you mess with them. I say, go Israel! Kick some terrorist ass.
Let's disect this and stop when we get to an ignorant, biased statement without any sort of factual basis.

Israel has all the right to attack,
The terrorists strongholds.

they have been pushed around by people who should be shot for too long.
Oh look, the game is already over. Maybe you should go join the IDF so you can go shoot Arab people because we all know, all Arabian and Persian people are terrorists.

I would think the excessive show of force vs the people of Lebanon to "stop terrorists" would and should draw official militaries into the fight.

Israel's action against Lebanon can only serve to garner suppot for Hezbollah. Lebanon was already in financial trouble with a barely stable democratic government. Israel destroys their tourist season and damage tons of infrastructure as well as killing civilians. The next election will see Hizbollah members fill 70+% of the government of Lebanon.

This is the intention of the Israelis. They want to make sure stable their neighbors do not become stable democracies. Were a neighbor to become a reasonable nation, it might be able to get more international support and Israel might not have a blank check to do whatever it wants in the region.

So long as it is surrounded by terrorist states, it can play this card to justify any action whatsoever and continue getting billions of dollars a year from the US to ‘defend the only democracy in the region’.

You forget Israel did not start all this.......:headbang: :headbang: :headbang:

Actually, they did.

I mean, people can say "oh they kidnapped 2 IDF soldiers" but youd be ignoring the 6,000 innocent palestinians being detained without due process.

Actually, they did.

I mean, people can say "oh they kidnapped 2 IDF soldiers" but youd be ignoring the 6,000 innocent palestinians being detained without due process.

If they didn't have due process, how do you know that they are innocent? :rolleyes:

Actually, they did.

I mean, people can say "oh they kidnapped 2 IDF soldiers" but youd be ignoring the 6,000 innocent palestinians being detained without due process.

Actually, you're thinking of the United States. The U.S. has 15,000 prisoners in Iraq who are being detained without due process of law. Israel actually does grant due process to its detainees. Also, there's a difference between arresting terrorists (the Palestinian detainees you mentioned are mostly from Hamas (a terrorist organization)) and kidnapping soldiers from countries with whom you have a ceasefire.

If they didn't have due process, how do you know that they are innocent? :rolleyes:
Innocent until proven guilty? Ever hear of it?

Innocent until proven guilty? Ever hear of it?

In the US? Sure.

But US laws aren't applicable outside US borders. Ever hear of that one? ;)

In the US? Sure.

But US laws aren't applicable outside US borders. Ever hear of that one? ;)
Shockingly, thats not a United States-only precedent! :eek:

Andrew Jackson did this in the American Civil war (or the war between the states if you are from south of the mason dixon line) by burning everything on his way to atlanta, did it work?


Oh boy, Andrew Jackson if I'm correct was dead (or close to it) by 186(3,4,5). It was Sherman who did the famous march to the sea, if you want to spout off this and that at least have a basic understanding of what your talking about.