NationStates Jolt Archive

Civilians” in Lebanon have munitions in their basements and deliberately wish to draw fire; in Israel they are in bunkers to avoid it. Israel uses precision weapons to avoid hitting them; Hezbollah sends random missiles into Israel to ensure they are struck.

“Collateral damage” refers mostly to casualties among Hezbollah’s human shields; it can never be used to describe civilian deaths inside Israel, because everything there is by intent a target.

“Cycle of Violence” is used to denigrate those who are attacked, but are not supposed to win.

“Deliberate” reflects the accuracy of Israeli bombs hitting their targets; it never refers to Hezbollah rockets that are meant to destroy anything they can.

“Deplore” is usually evoked against Israel by those who themselves have slaughtered noncombatants or allowed them to perish — such as the Russians in Grozny, the Syrians in Hama, or the U.N. in Rwanda and Dafur.

“Disproportionate” means that the Hezbollah aggressors whose primitive rockets can’t kill very many Israeli civilians are losing, while the Israelis’ sophisticated response is deadly against the combatants themselves. See “excessive.”

Anytime you hear the adjective “excessive,” Hezbollah is losing. Anytime you don’t, it isn’t.

“Eyewitnesses” usually aren’t, and their testimony is cited only against Israel.

“Grave concern” is used by Europeans and Arabs who privately concede there is no future for Lebanon unless Hezbollah is destroyed — and it should preferably be done by the “Zionists” who can then be easily blamed for doing it.

“Innocent” often refers to Lebanese who aid the stockpiling of rockets or live next to those who do. It rarely refers to Israelis under attack.

The “militants” of Hezbollah don’t wear uniforms, and their prime targets are not those Israelis who do.

“Multinational,” as in “multinational force,” usually means “third-world mercenaries who sympathize with Hezbollah.” See “peacekeepers.”

“Peacekeepers” keep no peace, but always side with the less Western of the belligerents.

“Quarter-ton” is used to describe what in other, non-Israeli militaries are known as “500-pound” bombs.

“Shocked” is used, first, by diplomats who really are not; and, second, only evoked against the response of Israel, never the attack of Hezbollah.

“United Nations Action” refers to an action that Russia or China would not veto. The organization’s operatives usually watch terrorists arm before their eyes. They are almost always guilty of what they accuse others of.

Your thoughts?

Teh lol! :D . Biased, certainly, but unfortunately mostly true.

“Deliberate” reflects the accuracy of Israeli bombs hitting their targets; it never refers to Hezbollah rockets that are meant to destroy anything they can.

Heh, heh, heh.

Teh lol! :D . Biased, certainly, but unfortunately mostly true.



Heh, heh, heh.
There's plenty more where that came from!!;)

Your thoughts?I can understand why some people would laugh. That doesn't make it funny though. ;)

I can understand why some people would laugh. That doesn't make it funny though. ;)
It's funny in a very non-funny, tragic way.

Right, let's get BogMarsh in...

Right, let's get BogMarsh in...


Shish Kebab: proper way of dealing with friends of Hizziballah - and any and all slackers who suffer from the slows in the Clash of Cultures.


*munches on New Burmesia*

Shish Kebab: proper way of dealing with friends of Hizziballah - and any and all slackers who suffer from the slows in the Clash of Cultures.


*munches on New Burmesia*

You're a fan of Samuel Huntington aren't you?

It's funny in a very non-funny, tragic way.

Like the kind of funny where people stab their eyes out with sporks?

Civilians” in Lebanon have munitions in their basements and deliberately wish to draw fire; in Israel they are in bunkers to avoid it. Israel uses precision weapons to avoid hitting them; Hezbollah sends random missiles into Israel to ensure they are struck.

Id like to see a source.

“Collateral damage” refers mostly to casualties among Hezbollah’s human shields; it can never be used to describe civilian deaths inside Israel, because everything there is by intent a target.

How many of the 400+ Lebanese dead are Hezbollah supporters and/or Hezbollah themselves?

“Cycle of Violence” is used to denigrate those who are attacked, but are not supposed to win.

You mean not Israel?

“Deliberate” reflects the accuracy of Israeli bombs hitting their targets; it never refers to Hezbollah rockets that are meant to destroy anything they can.

Its hard to mistake ambulances with flashing lights and the red cross logo on top of them for Hezbollah.

“Deplore” is usually evoked against Israel by those who themselves have slaughtered noncombatants or allowed them to perish — such as the Russians in Grozny, the Syrians in Hama, or the U.N. in Rwanda and Dafur.

Um, that doesnt mean anything. I can say "killing is bad" yet still kill people. Its all a matter of perspective and what people think is "right".

“Disproportionate” means that the Hezbollah aggressors whose primitive rockets can’t kill very many Israeli civilians are losing, while the Israelis’ sophisticated response is deadly against the combatants themselves. See “excessive.”

No, disproportionate is 40 Israel deaths, 20 of which were IDF as compared to the 400 or so Lebanese dead, probably less than 20% pertaining to Hezbollah.

Anytime you hear the adjective “excessive,” Hezbollah is losing. Anytime you don’t, it isn’t.

Excessive is Israel bitching about 2 captured (yes, captured) soldiers when they themselves "kidnapped" 9,000 Palestinians and are holding them without process, probably for the long term.

“Eyewitnesses” usually aren’t, and their testimony is cited only against Israel.

You being an eyewitness yourself would know this, right?

“Grave concern” is used by Europeans and Arabs who privately concede there is no future for Lebanon unless Hezbollah is destroyed — and it should preferably be done by the “Zionists” who can then be easily blamed for doing it.

Um, okay.

“Innocent” often refers to Lebanese who aid the stockpiling of rockets or live next to those who do. It rarely refers to Israelis under attack.

Again, source please. Its ignorant to think no Lebanese citizen is innocent. I guess if Israel kills a bunch of people, they obviously had rockets in their fucking basement. :rolleyes:

The “militants” of Hezbollah don’t wear uniforms, and their prime targets are not those Israelis who do.

Like i said, out of 40 Israelis killed, 20 were IDF. A better legitimate kill ratio than Israel.

“Multinational,” as in “multinational force,” usually means “third-world mercenaries who sympathize with Hezbollah.” See “peacekeepers.”

Wow...just...wow...

“Peacekeepers” keep no peace, but always side with the less Western of the belligerents.

Because the Westerners are more belligerent.

“Quarter-ton” is used to describe what in other, non-Israeli militaries are known as “500-pound” bombs.

Oh give me a break.

“Shocked” is used, first, by diplomats who really are not; and, second, only evoked against the response of Israel, never the attack of Hezbollah.

Okay I am not even going to bother. Israel has always been the agressor, but say whatever you want.

“United Nations Action” refers to an action that Russia or China would not veto. The organization’s operatives usually watch terrorists arm before their eyes. They are almost always guilty of what they accuse others of.

Like?
Your thoughts?

This is retarded and idiotic.

<snippity snip>

so, you defend hypocritical aggressors?

how quaint.
FNORD

No, disproportionate is 40 Israel deaths, 20 of which were IDF as compared to the 400 or so Lebanese dead, probably less than 20% pertaining to Hezbollah.For dead, the current numbers are 51 dead on Israel's side, 33 of which are IDF, and 398 Lebanese (not including those trapped under rubble).

*snap*

*Buys Kazus a beer*

There's plenty more where that came from!!;)

So the stories about the size of the American posterior are true then.....

Shish Kebab: proper way of dealing with friends of Hizziballah - and any and all slackers who suffer from the slows in the Clash of Cultures.


*munches on New Burmesia*
What's the quickest way to a Hezzbollah militant's heart?







Through his ribcage, preferably with IMI made 5.56 ball ammo.

For dead, the current numbers are 51 dead on Israel's side, 33 of which are IDF, and 398 Lebanese (not including those trapped under rubble).

Umm last figures made it out to be about 50% hezz.

50% is good enough for me.

Umm last figures made it out to be about 50% hezz.

50% is good enough for me.

got a linky?

Civilians” in Lebanon have munitions in their basements and deliberately wish to draw fire; in Israel they are in bunkers to avoid it. Israel uses precision weapons to avoid hitting them; Hezbollah sends random missiles into Israel to ensure they are struck.

“Collateral damage” refers mostly to casualties among Hezbollah’s human shields; it can never be used to describe civilian deaths inside Israel, because everything there is by intent a target.

“Cycle of Violence” is used to denigrate those who are attacked, but are not supposed to win.

“Deliberate” reflects the accuracy of Israeli bombs hitting their targets; it never refers to Hezbollah rockets that are meant to destroy anything they can.

“Deplore” is usually evoked against Israel by those who themselves have slaughtered noncombatants or allowed them to perish — such as the Russians in Grozny, the Syrians in Hama, or the U.N. in Rwanda and Dafur.

“Disproportionate” means that the Hezbollah aggressors whose primitive rockets can’t kill very many Israeli civilians are losing, while the Israelis’ sophisticated response is deadly against the combatants themselves. See “excessive.”

Anytime you hear the adjective “excessive,” Hezbollah is losing. Anytime you don’t, it isn’t.

“Eyewitnesses” usually aren’t, and their testimony is cited only against Israel.

“Grave concern” is used by Europeans and Arabs who privately concede there is no future for Lebanon unless Hezbollah is destroyed — and it should preferably be done by the “Zionists” who can then be easily blamed for doing it.

“Innocent” often refers to Lebanese who aid the stockpiling of rockets or live next to those who do. It rarely refers to Israelis under attack.

The “militants” of Hezbollah don’t wear uniforms, and their prime targets are not those Israelis who do.

“Multinational,” as in “multinational force,” usually means “third-world mercenaries who sympathize with Hezbollah.” See “peacekeepers.”

“Peacekeepers” keep no peace, but always side with the less Western of the belligerents.

“Quarter-ton” is used to describe what in other, non-Israeli militaries are known as “500-pound” bombs.

“Shocked” is used, first, by diplomats who really are not; and, second, only evoked against the response of Israel, never the attack of Hezbollah.

“United Nations Action” refers to an action that Russia or China would not veto. The organization’s operatives usually watch terrorists arm before their eyes. They are almost always guilty of what they accuse others of.

Your thoughts?


Can you show SOURCES???

Umm last figures made it out to be about 50% hezz.

50% is good enough for me.

You'd sing a different tune if that other 50% was American citizens wouldn't you?

You'd sing a different tune if that other 50% was American citizens wouldn't you?

You'd be the one singing happily if it were 50% American citizens.

Fucking musicals! Everybody stop singing, already.

You'd be the one singing happily if it were 50% American citizens.

I would be much happier if it was just you really, or at least this persona you show on NSG. I wouldn't know these faceless Americans from Mahatma Ghandi, but you on the other hand, have displayed views which I find utterly reprehensible.

Would I kill you? Probably not. Would I be happy to know you are dead? Maybe. Your views aren't worth killing you for. But if you happened to stop a bus on a busy road in the wrong way, I wouldn't shed a tear for you.

The feeling is mutual I'm sure.

I wonder if any of these pro-Israel people ever think about the fact that the entire world seems to see Israel as a belligerent force. There has to be a lot of self-doubt there.

I wonder if any of these pro-Israel people ever think about the fact that the entire world seems to see Israel as a belligerent force. There has to be a lot of self-doubt there.


The whole world is wrong.

Just because something is popular by no means makes it right. I don't care how many people in the world think Israel is wrong, that doesn't make their position more right.

Kazus:

When has Israel ever been the aggressor? I can't seem to remember any occasions when Israel has acted militarily out of aggression and not defense.

And as for your "Israel kidnapped 9000 Palestinians and are keeping them in jail"...I think you might have meant to write "Israel has caught 9000 terrorists either trying to carry out a terror attack or were caught attempting to commit some other violent act. "

Also...you saying that the soldier were "captured" is giving legitimacy to Hizballahs' CROSS BORDER RAID into Israel and saying that it's ok to kidnap soldiers to bring about a solution to their grievances. By you giving legitimacy to this deliberate attack, you are also admitting that the aggressor that sparked this entire escalation was in fact Hizballah

When has Israel ever been the aggressor? I can't seem to remember any occasions when Israel has acted militarily out of aggression and not defense.


40 years holding the OT. And havent there been snatch raids and the odd mysterious exploding car in Lebanon and Syria betimes?

Can you show SOURCES???
This comment is so idiotic is doesn't even warrant a response. Neverthless, against my better judgement, I will respond.

Haven't you been paying attention to the news? To what that retard Kofi Annanus says? To the hypocrisy of the UN and the EU?

40 years holding the OT. And havent there been snatch raids and the odd mysterious exploding car in Lebanon and Syria betimes?
I would imagine the cars belonged to terrorists.

I would imagine the cars belonged to terrorists.

Regardless, its an aggressive act. As is the holding of the OT.

Regardless, its an aggressive act. As is the holding of the OT.
And sending 14 year old girls with bombs around their waists is not an aggressive act?

What's the OT?

And sending 14 year old girls with bombs around their waists is not an aggressive act?

What's the OT?

The occupied territories - the West Bank, Arab East Jerusalem etc.

The occupied territories - the West Bank, Arab East Jerusalem etc.
Ok, then, address my question in the above post.

Those are extremely small pieces of land, and if the Arabs don't want to be "occupied", why don't they move to one of the Palestinian nations?

Little did you know that the Palestinian nations don't want any more Palestinians. They could easily accept them, but they don't, because it would end the conflict, or at least decrease it sharply. This would cause the people to demand a government that actually works for them, and does more than find new ways to kill Jews.

So, you see, the Palestinians and Arabs are more of a hindrance to the peace process than Israel.

Ok, then, address my question in the above post.
Those are extremely small pieces of land, and if the Arabs don't want to be "occupied", why don't they move to one of the Palestinian nations?


There are no "Palestinian nations" hence their lack of a homeland. Normally when a people are unjustly occupied, its seen as 'the thing' to get the occupier fuck off back to his country. Otherwise I can go to a nice part of town with a house I want, beat seven shades of shite out of the occupants and take it for myself.

If these pieces of land are so small, then why does Israel want them? Why dont the settlers get back across the border and leave the natives be?


Little did you know that the Palestinian nations don't want any more Palestinians. They could easily accept them, but they don't, because it would end the conflict, or at least decrease it sharply.

So again - I beat the shit out them, they move out, and the guy next door has to take them, while I hang onto the house....



So, you see, the Palestinians and Arabs are more of a hindrance to the peace process than Israel.

But the Palestinians are not building colonies inside Israeli territory........

There are no "Palestinian nations" hence their lack of a homeland. Normally when a people are unjustly occupied, its seen as 'the thing' to get the occupier fuck off back to his country. Otherwise I can go to a nice part of town with a house I want, beat seven shades of shite out of the occupants and take it for myself.

If these pieces of land are so small, then why does Israel want them? Why dont the settlers get back across the border and leave the natives be?

So again - I beat the shit out them, they move out, and the guy next door has to take them, while I hang onto the house....

But the Palestinians are not building colonies inside Israeli territory........
Ever hear of Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Egypt? There's no reason at all why they can't accept the Palestinians in the OT.

I think that you misunderstand WHY Israel "occupies" those territories. It's not because they're imperialist Arab-hating Zionists. It's because the Palestinians send their own young sons and daughters to kill Jews and Israeli Arabs. Israelis need to protect themselves. Hence, the checkpoints, and walls surrounding some towns in the "OT."

Also, Palestinians aren't the "natives." Jews lived in Israel for thousands of years, and they have as much a right to it as anyone else.

Every war that Israel fights is defensive. If the Palestinians in the "occupied territories" all left, and if Israel's neighbors stopped attacking Israel (don't hold your breath for that, though), you would have peace in the Middle East. Or at least, that part of the mid east. There's still Iraq.

The Jews made a paradise in the dessert. The Palestinians live in squalor and poverty. Instead of establishing ties of friendship and commerce with Israel, the Palestinians choose hate and war.

You'd sing a different tune if that other 50% was American citizens wouldn't you?
Is america harboring a major terrorist organization and making no active attempt to stop said organization? If so, then sure, it'd be fine.

40 years holding the OT. And havent there been snatch raids and the odd mysterious exploding car in Lebanon and Syria betimes?


There were Arab attacks against Israel before the '67 war. Before the '67 war the Arab countries were fighting against the very existence of Israel, no '67 borders or anything like that. Only after they lost their attempted war of extermination in '67 did the Arabs change their rallying cry.

The PLO was founded in 1964, 3 years before Israel took the territories in it's defensive war 3 years later. Every January 1st, Palestinians celebrate Fatah day, commemorating the PLOs first attack against Israel on the first of January 1965...two years before the '67 war.

If it was about occupation, why weren't there violent attacks by the Palestinians against Jordan or Egypt when they were occupying the West Bank and Gaza Strip from '48-'67???

EDIT: Who launched the 1948 War of Independance? Israel sure didn't launch it. It was forced upon them by the Arab nations that invaded the small initial sliver of land that was to be Israel. Who was launching terror campaigns against Israel throughout the 50s?

Its hard to mistake ambulances with flashing lights and the red cross logo on top of them for Hezbollah.

Are you so sure?

http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAArchive/2000_2009/2003/12/The%20Palestinian%20use%20of%20ambulances%20and%20medical%20mate

http://www.israellycool.com/blog/_archives/2004/10/3/153127.html

...No, disproportionate is 40 Israel deaths, 20 of which were IDF as compared to the 400 or so Lebanese dead, probably less than 20% pertaining to Hezbollah.

...Like i said, out of 40 Israelis killed, 20 were IDF. A better legitimate kill ratio than Israel.

...This is retarded and idiotic.

Speaking of retarded and idiotic - that would pretty much sum up Hezbollah's idea to attack Israel and their continued attacks and refusal to return the hostage. If the response was so disproportionate then they would have done so by now, huh.

Besides - since when is the use of force NOT supposed to be disproportionate? That is the whole point afterall - make the penalty not worth any perceived benefit - right? It's be pretty retarded and idiotic to believe that it should just be some sick game of tit for tat.

Then there is the retarded and idiotic people of Lebanon who are supporting Hesbollah in their lunatic attacks on Israel.

All they have to do is stop attacking Israel and return the hostages and it is over. As far as the prisoners in Israel - proove that they are either kidnapped, innocent or both - and then explain how killing and kidnapping is a constructive way to gain their release.

One of your sources is a blog, the other is from the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs. I'd trust those sources about as much as I'd trust al-Jazeera.

Ok, then, address my question in the above post.

Those are extremely small pieces of land, and if the Arabs don't want to be "occupied", why don't they move to one of the Palestinian nations?

Little did you know that the Palestinian nations don't want any more Palestinians. They could easily accept them, but they don't, because it would end the conflict, or at least decrease it sharply. This would cause the people to demand a government that actually works for them, and does more than find new ways to kill Jews.

So, you see, the Palestinians and Arabs are more of a hindrance to the peace process than Israel.

American seem to bo so concerned about alien emmigrant, why dont they just leave there land and go somewhere esle?

Oh yes, because they dont want to quit the land they where raised on.

Also, Palestinians aren't the "natives." Jews lived in Israel for thousands of years, and they have as much a right to it as anyone else.

And what about native american who got screwed? Let's get all white american back to england!:rolleyes:

...snip..
“United Nations Action” refers to an action that Russia or China would not veto. The organization’s operatives usually watch terrorists arm before their eyes. They are almost always guilty of what they accuse others of.

Your thoughts?

Lots of truth here. See my sig for more on the UN.

Technically, Hezbollah hide the bases right in the heart of Residential or Commercial areas. Israel do not. There for, Israel are targetting Hezbollah bases but the Hezbollah target civilians.

Yes, hence why the US veto's more resolutions about israel than all the other countries that can Veto.

Technically, Hezbollah hide the bases right in the heart of Residential or Commercial areas. Israel do not. There for, Israel are targetting Hezbollah bases but the Hezbollah target civilians.

Doesn't Israel have compulsary military service? Doesn't that mean that a large number of the IDF, inactive at least, "hide" among civilians?

Besides, attacking refugee buses, UN bases, cell phone towers, ambulances, and roads? Those are all hezbollah, right? Israel simply justifies bombing anything in lebanon by saying "hezbollah could be using this somehow, some way!"

Doesn't Israel have compulsary military service? Doesn't that mean that a large number of the IDF, inactive at least, "hide" among civilians?


No....


Besides, attacking refugee buses, UN bases, cell phone towers, ambulances, and roads? Those are all hezbollah, right? Israel simply justifies bombing anything in lebanon by saying "hezbollah could be using this somehow, some way!"

Yes they make mistakes, but they at least admit it when they do. Hezbollah do no such thing. (by the way, bombing roads stops arm supplies and the Hezbollah from getting into Israel.

Yes they make mistakes, but they at least admit it when they do. Hezbollah do no such thing. (by the way, bombing roads stops arm supplies and the Hezbollah from getting into Israel.
It also prevents medical supplies from getting into hot zones, and civvies from getting out.

by the way, bombing roads stops arm supplies and the Hezbollah from getting into Israel.

And like I said, Israel is using the excuse for pretty much anything it wants to bomb "Hezz can use it!"

If 98% of the use of the road is civilian, and once in a while a truck goes down with weapons, that makes it a military legit target?

Besides, the IDF does have compulsary service

"National military service is compulsory for Jewish and Druze men, and Jewish women, over the age of 18, although exemptions may be made on religious, physical or psychological grounds (see Profile 21). Men in the Haredi community may choose to be exempt while enrolled in Yeshivas, a practice that is a source of tension [2], though some yeshiva programs like Hesder provide opportunities for service.

Men serve three years in the IDF, while women serve two and sometimes under two. The IDF may on occasions require women who volunteer for combat positions to serve for three years because combat soldiers must undergo a lengthy period of training. Women in combat positions are also required to serve as reserve for several years after their dismissal from regular service, pending marriage, or pregnancy, is in order.
[edit]

Reserve Service

Following regular service, men may be called for reserve service of up to one month annually, until the age of 43-45 (reservists may volunteer after this age), and may be called for active duty immediately in times of crisis. In most cases, the reserve duty is carried out in the same unit for years, in many cases the same unit as the active service and by the same people. Many soldiers who have served together in active service continue to meet in reserve duty for years after their discharge, causing reserve duty to become a strong male bonding experience in Israeli society."

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

Hezbollah is using unguided rockets, and have little intelligence gathering capabilities. Couldn't one argue they are trying to hit IDF reserve members, etc?

And like I said, Israel is using the excuse for pretty much anything it wants to bomb "Hezz can use it!"

If 98% of the use of the road is civilian, and once in a while a truck goes down with weapons, that makes it a military legit target?


Yes yes yes, but the point is they are not deliberately trying to kill civs.


Besides, the IDF does have compulsary service

*SNIP*



Yes, but that doesn't mean the literally situate their bases in the heart of civilian areas.


Hezbollah is using unguided rockets, and have little intelligence gathering capabilities. Couldn't one argue they are trying to hit IDF reserve members, etc?

Unguided rockets are a dodgy term, it doesn't mean that they can't aim at a certain area, just that it isn't as precise. That doesn't mean they are intentionally trying to hit civs though.

Ever hear of Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Egypt? There's no reason at all why they can't accept the Palestinians in the OT.

They are not "Palestinian nations" as you put it earlier, and why should any nation support the ethnic cleansing of its neighbour?


I think that you misunderstand WHY Israel "occupies" those territories. It's not because they're imperialist Arab-hating Zionists. It's because the Palestinians send their own young sons and daughters to kill Jews and Israeli Arabs. Israelis need to protect themselves. Hence, the checkpoints, and walls surrounding some towns in the "OT." .

No, that would required checkpoints, walls and the like at the Israeli border. It does not explain why they build suburban housing for Israeli citizens outside Israels borders.


Also, Palestinians aren't the "natives." Jews lived in Israel for thousands of years, and they have as much a right to it as anyone else. .

Well the Palestinians are there as long, which means that they too are natives, and as the vast majority there now arrived after 1900, the average Israeli rather less so.


Every war that Israel fights is defensive. If the Palestinians in the "occupied territories" all left, and if Israel's neighbors stopped attacking Israel (don't hold your breath for that, though), you would have peace in the Middle East. Or at least, that part of the mid east. There's still Iraq. .

So if the Palestinians submitted to ethnic cleansing, then everything would be ok. Despite the fact that it was their expulsion from what is now Israel that started a lot of this off in the first place.


The Jews made a paradise in the dessert.

Entirely untrue and without basis in fact.


The Palestinians live in squalor and poverty. Instead of establishing ties of friendship and commerce with Israel, the Palestinians choose hate and war.

Well being expelled from your home, and then being occupied by the people that did it not 20 years later does tend to have a harsh economic impact. And as you might note, it was Israel that decided to grab the OT. They chose "hate and war".


If it was about occupation, why weren't there violent attacks by the Palestinians against Jordan or Egypt when they were occupying the West Bank and Gaza Strip from '48-'67???.

Because its easier to accept some rule from ones cousin rather than ones enemy. And because they had just begun to organise themselves.

Yes they make mistakes, but they at least admit it when they do.

Bad news for you there....http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/suffolk/4534620.stm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,1643573,00.html

Yes yes yes, but the point is they are not deliberately trying to kill civs.



Yes, but that doesn't mean the literally situate their bases in the heart of civilian areas.



Unguided rockets are a dodgy term, it doesn't mean that they can't aim at a certain area, just that it isn't as precise. That doesn't mean they are intentionally trying to hit civs though.

Intentionally, probably not. Criminally negligent is a more likely view, in my eyes.

We don't know exactly how much of a "base" the IAF is firing at. Could be an apartment with the top floor being civilians, and the rest being arms and hezbollah. Could be a neighborhood with a couple hezbollah living in one house, with a couple small arms, and the IAF bombing it, while hiting the next 5 houses around it. We just have to take the IDF's word for it... Which doesn't make me assured of much.

Yes, they can be targeted at a town, maybe a section of town... but you can't really choose specific buildings(unless they are very pronounced), etc. It would be really hard to target actual military bases with them, is what I'm saying.

Though don't get me wrong. I think Hezbollah is provoking this conflict. I just think the IDF is going a really bad way about dealing with this. They should have tried to work with the lebanese government at first, and if it didn't pan out, then they should have started actually bombing, etc(and I mean telling the lebanese govt. that you are going to come in and try to find the hezz, and that if they want to help get rid of them and get the conflict over quick, they'd cooperate; not trying to get them to do the impossible task themselves, which they wouldn't do in fear of civil war).

If the lebanese govt didn't accept, Israel should have invaded with boots on the ground. Little in the way of occupation, mostly lightning strikes around lebanon, specifically the south, killing as many hezbollah as possible.

Because its easier to accept some rule from ones cousin rather than ones enemy. And because they had just begun to organise themselves.

You just made my point. The Palestinians are simply the same Arabs as the rest of the Arabs in the Middle East. Same culture, same ethnicity. They are identical to the Arabs living everywhere else, they just got the short end of the stick by being the ones singled out as a propoganda tool to use against Israel by their own cousins. What kind of cousins place their relatives into camps? Not very good ones. Take a deeper look at this problem, and you will see the root cause of it: the refusal to accept a non-Islamic/Arab state in the Middle East.

As for beginning to organize themselves, that's crap. There were constant attacks against Israel by the fedayeen who continually crossed the border to commit raids into Israel during the 50's and into the 60's. Besides, before '67, the "Palestinians" were living with their COUSINS, the Arab states, and they were busying themselves with trying to destroy Israel.

You just made my point. The Palestinians are simply the same Arabs as the rest of the Arabs in the Middle East. Same culture, same ethnicity..

The Scots, Welsh and French, as celts, are my "cousins". They are different however. Likewise the Palestinians.



They are identical to the Arabs living everywhere else, they just got the short end of the stick by being the ones singled out as a propoganda tool to use against Israel by their own cousins...

Why is it that you have to constantly denigrate these people? Does it make it easier to process the rather brutal nessecities that are required keeping the occupation going?


What kind of cousins place their relatives into camps? Not very good ones. Take a deeper look at this problem, and you will see the root cause of it: the refusal to accept a non-Islamic/Arab state in the Middle East.]...

As for what people do to their cousins, would you like to go into the treatment of Sephradic Jews from North Africa when they arrived in Israel?

And even if that part about a non-Arab state was true, it still doesn't deprive the Palestinians of the right to their own state.


As for beginning to organize themselves, that's crap. There were constant attacks against Israel by the fedayeen who continually crossed the border to commit raids into Israel during the 50's and into the 60's. .

Disorganised, ineffective, unco-ordinated.


Besides, before '67, the "Palestinians" were living with their COUSINS, the Arab states, and they were busying themselves with trying to destroy Israel.

The majority seem to have been more intent on struggling through day to day. Until they were occupied by the people who evicted them once more.

Is america harboring a major terrorist organization and making no active attempt to stop said organization? If so, then sure, it'd be fine.

The IRA was certainly in possession of a significant and tangible support base in the US during its violent period. I do not believe there were any attempts to suppress it.

Domestic terrorists groups on the other hand, have so little focus that they're practically invisible to law enforcement. I point you to PETA's militant arm. ELF I believe. Granted, no direct loss of life has been attributed to their actions, but so far, they have done enough to deserve the label of terrorist organization.

I have yet to see any real attempts to stop these organizations, much less a campaign that would result in 50% casualty rates among unafilliated civilians.