Author
|
Topic: Hizbollah vows it will leave "no place" safe for Israelis
|
EmmaG
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12605
|
posted 24 July 2006 03:46 PM
Hezbollah envoy Hossein Safiadeen's warning today: quote: The Hizbullah representative in Iran struck a defiant tone Monday, warning that his group plans to widen its attacks on Israel until "no place" is safe for Israelis. "We are going to make Israel not safe for Israelis. There will be no place they are safe," Hossein Safiadeen told a conference that included the Tehran-based representative of the Palestinian group Hamas and the ambassadors from Lebanon, Syria and the Palestinian Authority. "You will see a new Middle East in the way of Hizbullah and Islam, not in the way of Rice and Israel," Safiadeen said. Safiadeen reinforced earlier threats by Hizbullah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah to widen their attacks, which have included unprecedented missile strikes deep into northern Israel. The comments by Safiadeen reflected the deep opposition within Hezbollah to any diplomatic initiative to halt the fighting, including apparent attempts by Arab powers to pressure Syria into ending its support for Hizbullah and leave Iran as its lone major backer.
[ 24 July 2006: Message edited by: EmmaG ]
From: nova scotia | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323
|
posted 24 July 2006 04:31 PM
Fine, EmmaG, I'll pretend you care about justice and peace in the Middle East and give you a serious answer. Who knows, I may have read you wrong all this time.I believe Hizbullah's threats, and they worry me as a Jew and a progressive person. The Israeli government, which is duty-bound to protect Israelis, should contact the Lebanese government, say that it is stopping its murderous attacks on Lebanon right now without pre-conditions, invite them to discuss a prisoner exchange with Hizbullah, open broad-ranging discussions about border security, seek recognition of the state of Israel in exchange for recognition of Hizbullah as a legitimate expression of the Lebanese national resistance and the right of Lebanon to exist within secure borders, make a decent offer on the Shebaa farms issue, and ask Hizbullah politely to commit to stopping all cross-border attacks and rockets immediately while negotiations continue.
From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
EmmaG
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12605
|
posted 24 July 2006 04:40 PM
Unionist, I care deeply about peace everywhere on Earth. I agree that Isreal should stop bombing Lebanon, as it is not getting them anywhere. However, what would "politely asking" Hezbollah to stop rocketing them do? Hezbollah has been asked by many people, including the UN to stop rocketing. Also, why would Hezbollah want to recognize the legitimacy of an organization that wants to leave them no safe place to live and wants to kill them all?
From: nova scotia | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
vancity75
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12781
|
posted 24 July 2006 06:08 PM
quote: Originally posted by unionist:
seek recognition of the state of Israel in exchange for recognition of Hizbullah as a legitimate expression of the Lebanese national resistance
Resisting what?
From: Vancouver | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
EmmaG
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12605
|
posted 24 July 2006 06:23 PM
quote: Originally posted by Frustrated Mess: And if asked nicely, would Israel end the occupation of Palestinian lands, return to the '67 borders, and recognize a Palestinian state? (Also UN resolutions, no?) Or has your logic just provided a defence for rocket attacks and suicide bombings (i.e. because Israel won't end the occupation, land seizures, and brutality on its own accord)?[ 24 July 2006: Message edited by: Frustrated Mess ]
Hezbollah's position is that Israelis should not be in the middle east, not in pre-67 borders, or not on 1 square km. I have made my position clear that in other threads that UN resolution 242 must be recognized, as should 1559. It is not just Isreal that must do something. Both sides are at fault. I'm not sure why some are only willing to condems the violence committed by Isreal. MY question is how do you deal with people who say that they have no interest in diplomacy and that the entire middle east, or planet, should not be safe for Israelis? I disagree strongly with Israel's disproportionate bombardment of Lebanon, but they are warning civilians to leave. Hezbollah is bent on killing civilians specifically. As well, most Lebanese people do not support Hezbollah and want them disarmed, so that their own government can regain control of the land Hezbollah has been occupying.
From: nova scotia | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312
|
posted 24 July 2006 06:41 PM
quote:
Hezbollah's position is that Israelis should not be in the middle east, not in pre-67 borders, or not on 1 square km.
Is that not Israel's position with reagrd to Hezbollah? What does a Hezbollah look like? An Arab? Is it more appropriate for Israel to call for the complete destruction of Hezbollah than Hezbollah to call for the destruction of a nation that is expansionist and considers Arab lives cheap? quote:
I have made my position clear that in other threads that UN resolution 242 must be recognized, as should 1559. It is not just Isreal that must do something. Both sides are at fault. I'm not sure why some are only willing to condems the violence committed by Isreal.
But that's not true. We can agree violence must end, but it was you who began this thread with the intent of putting attention on Hezbollah over what is, for all intents and purposes, an empty threat. Hezbollah has not the ways nor the means to make "no place" safe for Israelis yet Israel is making "no place" safe for Lebanese Arabs. quote:
MY question is how do you deal with people who say that they have no interest in diplomacy and that the entire middle east, or planet, should not be safe for Israelis?
The same way you deal with people who say they have no interest in diplomacy and are actively involved in an occupation, territorial expansion, and the collective punishment of an entire nation. quote:
I disagree strongly with Israel's disproportionate bombardment of Lebanon, but they are warning civilians to leave.
Well of course they are. Because the destruction of civilian infrastructure and the delivery of terror is a deliberate strategy to hobble Hezbollah with a mass human exodus. The Israeli defense minister has admitted to this strategy. Why try to pretend that the creation of a humanitarian disaster is a humanitarian act? quote:
Hezbollah is bent on killing civilians specifically.
Clearly so is Israel but Israel has a greater capacity to do so. quote:
As well, most Lebanese people do not support Hezbollah and want them disarmed, so that their own government can regain control of the land Hezbollah has been occupying.
Hezbollah did not exist until the brutal Israeli occupation of Lebanon. Then Hezbollah was a Shiite political and para-military force. Now? Lebanese Christians are turning in support of Hezbollah. Israel through their trademark cruelty and brutality of Arabs, is making Hezbollah stronger.Don't get me wrong. I have no sympathies for Hezbollah. But Israel makes it very hard to have any sympathy for it either. [ 24 July 2006: Message edited by: Frustrated Mess ]
From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
EmmaG
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12605
|
posted 24 July 2006 07:33 PM
The UN wants Hezbollah destroyed and the Lebanese people want them to stop occupying part of their country. So, Hezbollah is simply uttering empty threats because they don't have the means to act? Are rocket attacks not acting? Does their closeness to Iran not indicate that they possibly may get stronger? Israel needs to stop the bombardment of Lebanon and recognize a Palestinian state. I don't disagree with you there. But I'm surprised that when discussing Hezbollah, you support their right to exist as a militant organization undermining the Lebanese government. Does that mean I believe Israeli occupation has a right to exist? No.
From: nova scotia | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312
|
posted 24 July 2006 07:51 PM
EmmaG, here is something you might read that might cause you to think outside the sectarian box: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HG25Ak02.html quote: Far from a "terror group pure and simple" as repeatedly labeled by US government leaders, Hezbollah is a well-entrenched politico-military movement participating in the national life of Lebanon while, simultaneously, acting as a welfare arm of the Lebanese system by providing basic welfare services to its largely underclass mass constituency.
You can't demand anyone challenge their thinking if you don't challenge your own.
From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323
|
posted 24 July 2006 08:02 PM
quote:
Originally posted by unionist:seek recognition of the state of Israel in exchange for recognition of Hizbullah as a legitimate expression of the Lebanese national resistance Originally posted by vancity75: Resisting what?
Well, for one thing, decades of foreign illegal invasion and occupation of Lebanon by Israel. Or hadn't you noticed?
From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
jester
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11798
|
posted 24 July 2006 09:22 PM
quote: But that's not true. We can agree violence must end, but it was you who began this thread with the intent of putting attention on Hezbollah over what is, for all intents and purposes, an empty threat. Hezbollah has not the ways nor the means to make "no place" safe for Israelis yet Israel is making "no place" safe for Lebanese Arabs.
Hezbollah continues to surprise. They may well have the means to escalate the conflict.
From: Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790
|
posted 25 July 2006 01:33 AM
quote: Originally posted by vancity75:
Resisting what?
The occupation of Chebba farms for instance. DoH! What was I thinking Areil Sharon has his personal ranch at Chebba farms... no deal there, better to kill civilians in Lebanon than give up this essential part of Ersatz Israel. Areil Sharon's ranch at Cheba farms.
[ 25 July 2006: Message edited by: Cueball ]
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
EmmaG
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12605
|
posted 25 July 2006 06:49 AM
Cueball, I realize that Hezbollah has elected members of government and that it co-ordinates a wide range of social services. So have nearly all other genocidal maniacs throughout history who want a particular group of people to support their aims. Just because the US, Israel etc. caused and facilitated the preconditions for this support does not excuse Hezbollah's ideology.I would say that the majority of people who support Hezbollah do so for the reasons you suggest, but ultimately just want to live in peace beside an Israel that is no longer an occupying, military force. It's likely that only senior members want all Israelis killed. However, Hezbollah's control of schools is causing hate to become part of children's lesson plans. At least the UN humanatarian chief, Jan Egeland sees fit to condemn both "sides": "Beirut bombings violate humanitarian law" "Hezbollah cowardly blending amoung refugees" [ 25 July 2006: Message edited by: EmmaG ]
From: nova scotia | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Noise
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12603
|
posted 25 July 2006 07:43 AM
quote: The UN wants Hezbollah destroyed and the Lebanese people want them to stop occupying part of their country.
Should be important to note that this is the same UN that when the Lebanese gov't pleaded for immidiate intervention from day one, had the motion veto'd by the Americans. The UN (besides having it's hands tied) are badly biased in this case as well. Something thats hard to pick out is if these events were planned, or if we're seeing random escalations and peices landing where they might. Israel, whether they like it or not, has so far this military campaign has managed to:
1) Alienate itself from the international community (beyond America), both by policy and by the growing number of civilian deaths. CBC newsworld (channel 15 on my cable) shows the BBC newsworld broadcast (5:30 my time)... If you want to see a different view on this conflict, go see what the British are saying. Israel is losing allies quickly. 2) Strengthen Hizbollah support. Pending who you speak too, the Hizbollah have seen a giant spike in support. The Israeli and American medias are the ones to suggest there is hatred towards the Hizbollah for causing this, while other medias are focussing on the growing numbers support Hizbollah. This includes a growing number of Lebanese refugees who are being provided for by the Hizbollah social infrastructure. Should also note that international Hizbollah support has repidly increased as well. 3) Prove the Israeli army is still the same one that the Hizbollah chased off 6 years ago... The Hizbollah are standing their ground vs ariel bombardment and showing that they can combat a conventional military force effectively. Comparitively, the Israeli army has proven it's quite good at hitting civilian targets and begging the USians to send more guided bombs ASAP. 4) Disable and destabilize the Lebonese gov't. The only power that I can see disarming Hizbollah, a stable central Lebanon gov't, has seen their infrastructure blown to peices. I'd wager a guess that the Lebanese gov't has sufferred more damage/losses than the Hizbollah have so far. And this isn't considering the hypocritical responses by the Israeli military. Blow up every road leading into southern Lebanon, they flyer southern Lebanon telling civilians to get out or die basically. Smart hey, I'd like to ask the Israeli commanders how they expect them to leave AFTER THEY'VE DESTROYED ALL THE ROADS LEADING OUT. Hey, and make sure your gas tank is full, incidentally we've destroyed nearly every gas station along the way as well. The simple answer was the flyering wasn't intended to get people out of there, it was intended to show the international community 'they care about civilians' and to wash they're hands clear of it.
And as the Israeli have proven time and time again, the value of their 2 kidnapped soldiers is worth a collective punishment of over 600 Lebanese citizens dead. Despite all this, I'm supposed to support Israels plight apparently?
From: Protest is Patriotism | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
jester
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11798
|
posted 25 July 2006 07:57 AM
quote: Originally posted by Cueball: Waddya think, Mig 29's, bear bombers a few T-72's. Where they burried?Snarfle.
Naw, maybe the ability to destroy Israeli warships or armour with more sophisticated missile technology.Ya figger that may happen, Snarflist? Oh,right.It already has. No way Iranian Revolutionary Guards will help Hezbollah is there? Of course not. The very idea invites a snarflefest of denial.
From: Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
jester
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11798
|
posted 25 July 2006 08:03 AM
quote: I think it is going to get worse before it gets any better
Yes. There is no military solution but the military option may be used until there is nothing left to negotiate for.
From: Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
John K
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3407
|
posted 25 July 2006 08:27 AM
I find the whole premise behind this thread ludicrous.Of course, the envoy wants to play up Hizbollah's military capabilities in the current conflict. Seriously, what would you expect him to say: 'Geez we've pretty much shot our wad of missiles, we're getting routed by the IDF, and we'll soon be forced to surrender.' It's my understanding that Hizbollah would be only to happy to accept an immediate ceasefire so long as they get to negotiate prisoner releases in exchange for the captured IDF soldiers, and keep their militia in southern Lebanon. Of course, these conditions are not acceptable to Israel.
From: Edmonton | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Noise
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12603
|
posted 25 July 2006 08:28 AM
quote: Hezbollah continues to surprise. They may well have the means to escalate the conflict.
Nizrallah (I hope I spelt that right) is a brilliant guerilla tactician first and formost... He knows the art of terror and guerilla warfare inside and out. And he is the one that declared all out open warfare, which means he'll have a whole slew of surprises to come. Atleast my call on it... Theres been a couple days where the Hizbollah had sent more explosives into Israel than the Israeli's sent back into Lebanon. I get the feeling he may be waiting for the Israeli's to lull a bit before he unleashes another wave.
quote: Yes. There is no military solution but the military option may be used until there is nothing left to negotiate for.
I like that quote My guess is we're looking at a several month conflict by now... Possibly longer with growing escalations. The Israeli are still trying to setup a buffer zone, and with Hizbollah guerilla warfare to contend with, it might be many months before this occours. added for John K.
quote: Seriously, what would you expect him to say: 'Geez we've pretty much shot our wad of missiles, we're getting routed by the IDF, and we'll soon be forced to surrender.'
Problem is they've likely expended a tiny amount of their arsenal (by all estimates), are standing up to the Israeli's... Even taking out tanks and (possibly) helicopters. Given the terrain they are in and the populations support the enjoy, I doubt they'll ever be forced to completely surrender at this rate... The conflict only serves to make them more powerful. Besides, it's very much in the interest of the Hizbollah to draw out this conflict as long as possible (which is why Nizrallah will hold alot of arms in reserve) [ 25 July 2006: Message edited by: Noise ]
From: Protest is Patriotism | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312
|
posted 25 July 2006 08:44 AM
If the strategy was to make Hezbollah stronger ... Well done!!! quote: The US Secretary of State's surprise appearance was, her officials insisted, her own idea and was intended as a "public show of support for a valued ally" - though her security detail ensured she avoided the sight of the Lebanese demonstrators who were making it clear what they thought of Washington's idea of how to treat a supposed friend ..."We have been let down and betrayed," a senior government figure said last night ... If Israel believed that by bombing Lebanon it would provoke the rival communities in the country to turn their anger on Hezbollah, then the plan appears to have misfired. Even sworn enemies of the Shia militia in the Christian community are supporting Hezbollah's stand against Israel's invading tanks. Michel Araj, a doctor and former university lecturer, cannot remember having a good word for Hezbollah before, but says: "They are our only resistance. We don't want to be overrun again."
[ 25 July 2006: Message edited by: Frustrated Mess ]
From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312
|
posted 25 July 2006 08:58 AM
Well, in 1939, the aggressors were the NAZIs and they began the war by invading a sovereign state on the basis of a pretext. Not unlike Iraq. So, those who would apologize for wars of aggression in Iraq or in Lebanon would be the appeasers of today. quote: He holds that a militia has the rights of a sovereign state; including the right to declare war on behalf of said state.
Really? Where did I say that? Perhaps you could quote me?The lie of moral equivalence is the one that argues a collective punishment and war crimes committed against an entire people is equivalent to the capture of two soldiers. But I am glad you have come out of your shell.
From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
500_Apples
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12684
|
posted 25 July 2006 09:13 AM
quote: Really? Where did I say that? Perhaps you could quote me?
Allrighty then... quote: Is that not Israel's position with reagrd to Hezbollah? What does a Hezbollah look like? An Arab? Is it more appropriate for Israel to call for the complete destruction of Hezbollah than Hezbollah to call for the destruction of a nation that is expansionist and considers Arab lives cheap?
With that comment you are assigning a militia the same powers as a sovereign state. quote: The lie of moral equivalence is the one that argues a collective punishment and war crimes committed against an entire people is equivalent to the capture of two soldiers.
Two soldiers? How simplistic. It's about the unprovoked capture of two soldiers which would lead to more captures, AS WELL AS the hundreds and eventually thousands of rocket attacks which would only get worse. Perhaps in your view Israel should have waited for the Iranian national guard to arm Hezbollah with Nuclear warheads? [ 25 July 2006: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]
From: Montreal, Quebec | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
vancity75
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12781
|
posted 25 July 2006 09:40 AM
quote: Originally posted by Cueball:
The occupation of Chebba farms for instance. DoH! What was I thinking Areil Sharon has his personal ranch at Chebba farms... no deal there, better to kill civilians in Lebanon than give up this essential part of Ersatz [sic] Israel.
I'll take it as an honest mistake Cueball, but I think you need a geography lesson. Sharon's Sycamore Ranch (shown in your lovely photo) is actually between Sderot and Beit Kama, in southern Israel, not the Shebaa Farms region. The Shebaa issue, in turn, is one in which Syria remains the antagonist. With the exception of a few suspect maps, all historical maps of the border region show the Shebaa Farms (14 farms totalling aprox. 10 square km.) to have been Syrian territory before Israel took the Golan Heights. The UN has agreed. You can blame the colonial French for the confusion. The Lebanese dispute the border and while the Syrians quietly murmur about the area being Lebanese, Syria refuses to do anything but murmur. To resolve the Shebaa issue doesn't require much. Syria needs to agree to a demarcation of the border and follow up with something as simple, yet persuasive, as a diplomatic note, stating unequivocally that the territory is Lebanese. To date, Syria has been very effective in talking out of both sides of its mouth and, as a result, has been able to play the Shebaa issue to its sole advantage. It issues non-binding public pronouncements stating the Shebaa Farms are Lebanese, thus justifiying Hizbollah's "resistance," while at the same time refusing to demarcate the border which, in effect, confirms Syrian claims to the farms. Hizbollah then gets to fight as Syria's proxy army while ruining the lives of countless Lebanese and Israelis in the process. [ 25 July 2006: Message edited by: vancity75 ]
From: Vancouver | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
500_Apples
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12684
|
posted 25 July 2006 09:45 AM
Not Israel, but states. Israel has had, if you look at the generalized history, some successes in the peace process. Which successes? Jordan and Egypt. The obvious question then becomes why are these two special? And my perspective is that these are sovereign states, where the government has control. Peace is evidently possible with sovereign states. However, peace is evidently not possible with islamic fundamentalist militias who value martyrdom and want nothing less than the extermination of all 5+ million jews living in Israel. quote: So it is your argument that terror is the monopoly of the state of Israel?
War on behalf of states ought be the monopoly of the democratically elected leaders of said state. Hezbollah may have no right to unilaterally declare war on Israel on behalf of Lebanon, it did however have the capability. quote: Doesn't Israel have nuclear weapons? Or do we return to your contention that Israel enjoys a monopoly of violence and terror in the mid-east?
I don't know if Israel has nuclear weapons, but if they do it says a lot they have not used them. Because it is an absolute certainty that if Hamas or Hezbollah or Iran had nuclear weapons they would have launched a nuclear attack within twelve months. I'm about as bothered with India's nukes or China's nukes as I am with Israel's supposed arsenal.
From: Montreal, Quebec | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Noise
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12603
|
posted 25 July 2006 09:47 AM
quote: And of course that is where the dismal failing of Frustrated Mess' moral equivalence lies. He holds that a militia has the rights of a sovereign state; including the right to declare war on behalf of said state.
Might be impoortant to note that said militia also supplies civilian infrastructure and are a working portion of the Lebanon gov't (with their share of seats in the parliment). BBC does a decent job in outlining what exactly the Hizbollah are within Lebanon (sorta the second military... well, now the primary military). It was the same Hizbollah that is creditted with ending the Isreali occupation of Lebanon and they became a political force as such. This in mind... They lie in middle ground. The Hizbollah is much more than a militia in the tradiontal sense... And they are part of a soveriegn state, however are not one themselves. Makes them that much harder to deal with. quote: Perhaps in your view Israel should have waited for the Iranian national guard to arm Hezbollah with Nuclear warheads?
Might be too late for that (mind you the nuke will have come from N.Korea through Iran to Hizbollah, but thats simply logistics ^^) Mindyou, this is using the working assumption that it is completely OK for the Americans to supply nukes, phosphorous ammunitions, and guided bombs to Israel for use on Lebanese civilian and military targets, yet it's completely hideous that Iran be allowed to arm Hizbollah with missiles. added:
quote: However, peace is evidently not possible with islamic fundamentalist militias who value martyrdom and want nothing less than the extermination of all 5+ million jews living in Israel.
Hell of a quote... Remember it was the Israeli occupation that gave rise to Hizbollah Islamic fundamentalism back in '83 (and should be noted that you are walking the fine line grouping all the 'Islamic fundamentalism' as the same too). [ 25 July 2006: Message edited by: Noise ]
From: Protest is Patriotism | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312
|
posted 25 July 2006 09:57 AM
quote:
Not Israel, but states.
Ah, so you believe Israel, as a state, has the right to kill civilians with impunity by virtue of being a state? And victims of state terror and violence have no recourse? quote:
Israel has had, if you look at the generalized history, some successes in the peace process. Which successes? Jordan and Egypt. The obvious question then becomes why are these two special? And my perspective is that these are sovereign states, where the government has control.
That is simplistic and ignores Israel's dismal record of peace with its immediate neigbours. But the real reason for any agreements with Egypt and Jordan is because the governments of those states are US puppet regimes with Egypt, in particular, having little in the way of popular support and neither being democratically elected. quote:
Peace is evidently possible with sovereign states. However, peace is evidently not possible with islamic fundamentalist militias who value martyrdom and want nothing less than the extermination of all 5+ million jews living in Israel.
A bigotted comment so full of stereotyoes it is not worth a response. quote:
War on behalf of states ought be the monopoly of the democratically elected leaders of said state. Hezbollah may have no right to unilaterally declare war on Israel on behalf of Lebanon, it did however have the capability.
Again, what recourse to civilain victims of state violence have? By your logic both the United States and Israel are illegitimate states as both were born from civil violence, terrorism in today's language, against state actors. quote: Doesn't Israel have nuclear weapons? Or do we return to your contention that Israel enjoys a monopoly of violence and terror in the mid-east? quote:
I don't know if Israel has nuclear weapons, but if they do it says a lot they have not used them. Because it is an absolute certainty that if Hamas or Hezbollah or Iran had nuclear weapons they would have launched a nuclear attack within twelve months.
Again more bigotry. And yet the Arabs are accused of hate.[ 25 July 2006: Message edited by: Frustrated Mess ]
From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
jester
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11798
|
posted 25 July 2006 10:02 AM
quote: Nizrallah (I hope I spelt that right) is a brilliant guerilla tactician first and formost... He knows the art of terror and guerilla warfare inside and out. And he is the one that declared all out open warfare, which means he'll have a whole slew of surprises to come. Atleast my call on it... Theres been a couple days where the Hizbollah had sent more explosives into Israel than the Israeli's sent back into Lebanon. I get the feeling he may be waiting for the Israeli's to lull a bit before he unleashes another wave.
Yes, thats my opinion also. Hezbollah will use its surprises to its best strategic,if not tactical advantage in order to maximise the psychological impact not only on the Israelis but for their Iranian masters. Syria is bypassed and is now defacto Iran's prison bitch.
From: Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
500_Apples
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12684
|
posted 25 July 2006 10:10 AM
It isn't bigotry to take others at their word. quote: its frequent declarations that the "Zionist Entity" must be destroyed, as music videos shown on its Lebanese TV station put it. (One sample title: "We Will Kill All The Jews.")
first link quote: Mansour pressed a button, and the images disappeared from the screen. "The idea is that even if the Jews are killing us we can still kill them. That we derive our power from blood. It's saying, 'Get ready to blow yourselves up, because this is the only way to liberate Palestine.' '' The video, he said, would be shown after the next attack in Israel. He said he was thinking of calling it "We Will Kill All the Jews." I suggested that these videos would encourage the recruitment of suicide bombers among the Palestinians. "Exactly," he replied.
second link By the way - Iran is not an arab country. I have no qualms with ethnic groups, that strikes me as absurd. What I fear most in the world is religious fundamentalism. [ 25 July 2006: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]
From: Montreal, Quebec | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Noise
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12603
|
posted 25 July 2006 10:26 AM
Apples, plz watch the news sources you take as truth. The first link: quote: That's leaving aside Hezbollah's 1983 murder of 241 U.S. Marines stationed in Lebanon, its murder of CIA Beirut chief William Buckley a few years later,
Please correct me if I'm wrong... But if you count these 241 us marines as murdered, you should also be calling the 2000+ marines dead in Iraq as murdered. They were part of an occupational force and the Hizbollah were those fighting it. Who'da guessed they'd label their enemy as murders, but the dead Lebanese (civ and military) were simply casualties ^^ The second link is an interesting one as it's a lil dated. Though this part is nice to see:
quote: I tried to turn the conversation to Islamic beliefs—in particular, the rationale for suicide attacks. In the early nineteen-eighties, Fadlallah was accused of blessing the suicide bomber who destroyed the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut in 1983, a charge that he heatedly denied to me. He pointed out that he was among the first Islamic clerics to condemn the September 11th attacks, though he blamed American foreign policy for creating the atmosphere that led to them. He has, however, endorsed attacks on Israeli civilians. Suicide, he said, is not an absolute value. It is an option left to a people who are without options, and so the act is no longer considered suicide but martyrdom in the name of self-defense. "This is part of the logic of war," he said.
It's important to note the Hizbollah suicide bombers where that out of nessescity. They lacked guns or any form of weaponry short of attaching explosives to themselves to fight back. You know you're into good territory when the only way to defend yourself is to blow yourself up hey? I mean punching the tank won't work, what other options were they left with. It is also important to note that Hizbollah condemns terror attacks... Suicide bombers, the ones invented by Hizbollah, were to fight the occupation forces. It was other 'extremeists' that took suicide to the new level. Unfortunately it is very popular belif (and is why I mentioned careful with the 'islamic extremism' comparissons) that Hizbollah and Al Qaeda hold the same views on matyrdom. I will say, the MSM has done a fantastic job with ensruing that we beleive all muslim factions are ultimaetly the same terrorists cheering on the 9/11 attacks.
[ 25 July 2006: Message edited by: Noise ]
From: Protest is Patriotism | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
S1m0n
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11427
|
posted 25 July 2006 12:02 PM
quote: Hezbollah's resistance to the previous occuptation was one thing. It could have happened in any other country. Unilaterally declaring war on Israel with the soldier ambushes in Israeli territory and the rocket attacks is another thing.
Huh? Israel is still holding Hezbollah members in prison, for the 'crime' of resisting the Israeli invasion/occupation of Lebanon. That's not a crime, so keeping them in prison beyond the end of hostilities means that hostilities haven't ended--the two groups are still at war. There was nothing unilateral about Hezbollah's action.
From: Vancouver | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312
|
posted 25 July 2006 12:04 PM
quote: Hezbollah's resistance to the previous occuptation was one thing. It could have happened in any other country. Unilaterally declaring war on Israel with the soldier ambushes in Israeli territory and the rocket attacks is another thing.
I'm sorry, I think you are a bigot and normally I would cease communicating with you. But again, you are wrong. Israel was acting inside Lebanon, inside Hezbollah controlled territory, before Hezbillah captured a single soldier. As well, the evidence would suggest that the Israeli soldiers were captured in Lebanon not in Israel.Are you interested in truth or only information that supports your anti-Arab, pro-Israeli, bigotry? quote: The militant group Hezbollah captured two Israeli soldiers during clashes Wednesday across the border in southern Lebanon, prompting a swift reaction from Israel, which sent ground forces into its neighbor to look for them.
http://www.forbes.com/technology/feeds/ap/2006/07/12/ap2873051.htmlThat is but one of several initial stories that all indicate the Israeli soldiers were captured while violating Lebanese territory. So where does that leave us? The Israelis are an agressive, religious, regime that is militarized, violates the territory of its neighbours, is expansionist, and has targetted civilians in a war against an "ally" to avenge the capture of soldiers who quite likely were involved in illegal cross-border operations. Who are the fanatics? [ 25 July 2006: Message edited by: Frustrated Mess ]
From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
S1m0n
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11427
|
posted 25 July 2006 12:29 PM
quote: Originally posted by Frustrated Mess: That is but one of several initial stories that all indicate the Israeli soldiers were captured while violating Lebanese territory. So where does that leave us?
I think you have this one partically incorrect. Hezbollah DID raid within Israel, AFAIK, and did capture 2 soldiers and kill 3. It was apparrantly two hours before Israel even knew they were missing. When they learned, Israel then dispatched a tank into lebanon on some purpose they haven't identified (the kidnappers were long gone). However, the tank hit a mine a few yards over the border and all five of its crew were killed. These events were part of the same news cycle so we think they're one, but they're really two different actions--the Hezbollah raid, and an Israli counterattack into lebanon. ~~ However, if we accept that a counterattack into opposing territory is a legitimate response to the capture of soldiers, then Hezbollah's raid which responded to Israel's continuing imprisonment of lebanese prisoners held over from the war) was exactly as legit.
From: Vancouver | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
venus_man
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6131
|
posted 25 July 2006 12:42 PM
It is not a question of Hiz-ah action or non-action. They need to be destroyed, and that is the whole point of current events. The intensified calls for Israel’s destruction from Iran, plus increased militarization and tunnel/bunker network in Lebanon, increased Ork (Hiz-h) population etc. calls for immediate action, an amputation of a sort. You don’t do diplomacy with bunch of barbarians and hooligans, because they do not represent a nation or a country or a government. Their leader- a looser#1, simply pretends to be religious thus blaspheming the Islam. Just for that he deserves to be annihilated. Needs to be remembers that Hiz-h is a group, a cult of a sort, a military organization that has no place in a modern world. Israel is a state, modern democratic state. Two different things. So is Lebanon -a state that is not at war with the state of Israel, and never had such intentions, at least publicly at this time.
From: outer space | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
S1m0n
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11427
|
posted 25 July 2006 12:46 PM
quote: Originally posted by 500_Apples:
Does Hezbollah have all the rights of a sovereign state?
They have that one.
From: Vancouver | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
S1m0n
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11427
|
posted 25 July 2006 12:48 PM
quote: Originally posted by venus_man: It is not a question of Hiz-ah action or non-action. They need to be destroyed, and that is the whole point of current events.
Israel has no capacity to destroy Hezbollah. They've tried once, and failed at the task. They are already failing again.
From: Vancouver | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Noise
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12603
|
posted 25 July 2006 01:26 PM
Bleh, Venus_man, I enjoy your presence in this thread, simply because it displays how ignorant popular opinion is on the matter... I'm actually questioning if you're aiming for some Colbertesque humour. Actually if I re-read your post from that standpoint, it's pretty funny... Great satire of the Israeli media ya got going there quote: Israel has no capacity to destroy Hezbollah. They've tried once, and failed at the task. They are already failing again.
Hizbollah the first time they chased off the military had little support and next to no funding. Their tactics on the battlefield included having troops that knew the terrain well enough to sneak up on Israeli positions and when they are just meters away, blow themselves up... This tactic proved exceedingly effective, so y'know they were successful in sneaking up that close. Now since then they've received funding and huge jumps in support. The same troops capable of getting within a couple of meters can now use the same tactics, except rely on gun fire or missiles instead (so they don't need to get that close any longer) This ontop of roadside bomb tactics... Fiberglass rocks lined with ball bearings with explosives under that. A guerilla would hide nearby and when he felt the time was right, he'd hit the button. Nasrallah is arguably the leading guerilla warfare mind out there and it was HIM that declared the all out war and not Israel... Meaningfully he feels is more than prepared to take on Israeli troops. He has specialized fighting against Israeli tactics for years upon years... Israel will not succeed in wiping out Hizbollah.
quote: sometimes below the apartment buildings it seems.
LMAO... is that the justification behind bombing Lebanese apartment buildings then? added: quote: Lebanon now have an opportunity for becoming clean of alien fanatical elements, transforming into self-contained democratic state that doesn’t need any military group fighting on its behalf a war that is not welcomed by Lebanese.
This is how Hizbollah rose in the first place... You really think a Lebanon that has had it's infrastructure thoroughly bombed will be able to say 'thanks for bombing us, we'll get on them Hizbollah and disarm them immidiately (which we can't get to now that you've destroyed the roads. In the past it's been the Hizbollah that rebuilt most of the roads, so maybe they can hurry up and rebuild roads so Lebanon can come in and disarm them afterwards ^^.) This of course would come after thanking them for chasing off the Israeli invaders. [ 25 July 2006: Message edited by: Noise ]
From: Protest is Patriotism | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
B.L. Zeebub LLD
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6914
|
posted 25 July 2006 01:43 PM
quote: You don’t do diplomacy with bunch of barbarians and hooligans, because they do not represent a nation or a country or a government.
Barbarians who run massive social infrastructure programs, cultural and media outlets, are capable of using modern weaponry. Mind your racism. quote: Their leader- a looser#1, simply pretends to be religious thus blaspheming the Islam. Just for that he deserves to be annihilated.
Death threats? Nice. This is just getting better and better. Would it be kosher to call for Olmert's head? I mean, in a "modern, civilised, democratic" way, of course... quote: Needs to be remembers that Hiz-h is a group, a cult of a sort, a military organization that has no place in a modern world. Israel is a state, modern democratic state.
If anything, non-state actors are increasing in importance in international affairs. Far from being an anachronism, non-state militias, mercenaries, multi- and trans-national corporations, NGOs, and a withering nation-state are the modern world. Reactionary political and military organisations like Hizbollah are a (predictable) underside to the global expansion of capital and Western political and cultural power. Israel is another result of this expansion and is embroiled in this conflict largely because of it's role as Western imperial adjunct. [ 25 July 2006: Message edited by: B.L. Zeebub LLD ]
From: A Devil of an Advocate | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
B.L. Zeebub LLD
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6914
|
posted 25 July 2006 01:51 PM
quote: Lebanon now have an opportunity for becoming clean of alien fanatical elements, transforming into self-contained democratic state that doesn’t need any military group fighting on its behalf a war that is not welcomed by Lebanese.
Fanatics? Perhaps. Alien? Hardly. Hizbollah was/is a largely homegrown operation developed in response to the Israeli occupation of Lebanon, not to mention the expulsion of Palestinian Arabs from Israel in 1948, 1967 and further cleansings of the Galilee throughout Israel's history. There is nothing alien about them. They currently enjoy the support of a large swathe of Lebanese society, evidenced not only by massive participation in thier social programs by many Shiite Lebanese, but by their political standing in the Lebanese Parliament. The support they receive from outside actors (Iran, Syria) is because of their power within Lebanon and was not instrumental in their founding and early successes against Israel. The hypocritical suggestion by Israel and the Bush Bunch that supporting militant groups in other states to pursue your own policy is somehow dirty and backhanded is laughable on its face. Those two groups have a long and checkered history of associating with and providing funding/weapons to murderers, thugs, hooligans and miscreants of all stripes... Sabra and Chatilla anyone? [ 25 July 2006: Message edited by: B.L. Zeebub LLD ]
From: A Devil of an Advocate | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Merowe
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4020
|
posted 25 July 2006 02:01 PM
quote: Originally posted by venus_man: It is not a question of Hiz-ah action or non-action. They need to be destroyed, and that is the whole point of current events. The intensified calls for Israel’s destruction from Iran, plus increased militarization and tunnel/bunker network in Lebanon, increased Ork (Hiz-h) population etc. calls for immediate action, an amputation of a sort. You don’t do diplomacy with bunch of barbarians and hooligans, because they do not represent a nation or a country or a government. Their leader- a looser#1, simply pretends to be religious thus blaspheming the Islam. Just for that he deserves to be annihilated. Needs to be remembers that Hiz-h is a group, a cult of a sort, a military organization that has no place in a modern world. Israel is a state, modern democratic state. Two different things. So is Lebanon -a state that is not at war with the state of Israel, and never had such intentions, at least publicly at this time.
I'm reminded of a quote, might have been Churchill...an army of words wandering desperately across a barren terrain in search of an Idea. What a miserable clutch of testosterone-addled nonsense ...I can barely stoop to, ick, touch it. 'they need to be destroyed' By destroyed I suppose you mean hunted down and slaughtered like animals. Can you support this astonishing assertion? I mean, back it up with a list of Hezbollah atrocities that justify the complete abandonment of the civilized norms that apparently distinguish us from them? No. You can't. Any list, any compilation of Hezbollah 'atrocities' or excesses are as nothing to the ongoing criminality of the IDF. Which I CAN back up but won't bother, these boards are awash in data but its clearly not your thing. 'Increased militarization....in Lebanon' That country would have to spend several billions to match the militarization of the peace-loving neighbour currently bombing it into ruin. You actually float such thoroughgoing HYPOCRISY without batting an eye, incredible. Jawdropping. 'You don't do diplomacy with bunch of barbarians ...they do not represent a nation or a country or a government' How HAVE you managed to miss the countless references to Hezbollah's status in the Lebanese government with several members of parliament etc.? I mean, this is just brazen rubbish. Hezbollah do indeed represent a significant component of both the Lebanese population and its representative, democratic government. Ah, I give up; trying to wade through more of this garbage but there's no content here, nothing to hold onto, just a lot of venom that has more to do with its author than the real events that provide his excuse. Whatever; I hate to stress our worthy moderators, but you should really just fuck off with this gutterswill, this scurrilous, racist Neanderthal trolling of yours and not bother posting here anymore. Your contributions are completely worthless. Ad hominem enough for you?
From: Dresden, Germany | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323
|
posted 25 July 2006 04:20 PM
quote: Originally posted by Sven: Sad to say, but I don’t think that Israel will exist in the long-term, even if Israel pulled back to the 1967 borders (which many here apparently think is the magic solution). Fundamentalist Islamic radicals will continue to fight Israel until it is destroyed. Their eyes will then turn to Europe in earnest. I won’t see that in my lifetime and, because I am child-free, I’m glad I won’t have any progeny to witness it, either.
What's this, the Yellow Peril updated? Because you add adjectives like "fundamentalist" and "radical", you're not just fomenting racist hysteria? Earlier in your lifetime, the notion of religious militant groups fighting against Israel would have been laughed at as a bad joke. "You mean commie Soviet-backed terrorists, don't you?" would have been the reply. Fatah, PFLP, PDFLP, there wasn't an Allah-fearing nutbar among them. The U.S. and Israel, and the reactionary oil-soaked Arab regimes backed by the U.S., relentlessly discredited and destroyed any progressive, national democratic, socialist tendencies fighting for the Palestinian people. They backed, actively or passively, various religious groups as a counterweight, somewhat in the way they created Al Qaeda and Taliban in different circumstances further east. Today, they are reaping the whirlwind. Your response? That these momentary blips on the radar screen which are the extreme religious organizations have somehow become a permanent force which threatens the world. How nice. How profoundly analytical and historical. Do you get a gift-wrapped reward from Bush, Rice, and the other murderers for perpetuating such asinine fallacies?
From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
S1m0n
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11427
|
posted 25 July 2006 04:23 PM
quote: Originally posted by Sven: Fundamentalist Islamic radicals will continue to fight Israel until it is destroyed.
YEs, the radicals won't give up their hate. However, the PUBLIC will, and that's all you need to defeat them. In this war, whoever has the support of the Lebanese population WINS. If hezbollah has it, they can resist anything. If Israel gains it, it's game over for Hezbollah. Who do you think currently has this as their strategic aim?
From: Vancouver | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Merowe
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4020
|
posted 25 July 2006 04:25 PM
quote: Originally posted by Sven: Sad to say, but I don’t think that Israel will exist in the long-term, even if Israel pulled back to the 1967 borders (which many here apparently think is the magic solution). Fundamentalist Islamic radicals will continue to fight Israel until it is destroyed. Their eyes will then turn to Europe in earnest. I won’t see that in my lifetime and, because I am child-free, I’m glad I won’t have any progeny to witness it, either.
Where do you get this stuff? This reds-under-the-bed/yellow peril/Islamic fundamentalist-hordes-delusiona-paranoiac-fantasy- schlock-horror-stuff? Its priceless. Do you keep a gun under your pillow? To me it looks like the projection of some deeply irrational fear-of-the-other onto a convenient scapegoat-of-the-day. Freud would have a field day. What lies beneath it? Deepseated insecurities about the stability/longevity of our own culture? Perhaps a sleight of hand on the part of the unconscious, displacing legitimate practical concerns facing the west - environmental stress, resource exhaustion, inability to compete with rising eastern economies, peak oil, impending collapse - onto an externalized and eminently vanquishable 'foe', the imaginary 'Islamic Fundamentalist'? Can you give me ONE SINGLE example of a nation governed or dominated by your bogeyman-du-jour that did not first see its traditional/historical social infrastructure shredded by a colonialist war? Can you give me ONE SINGLE example....with anything LIKE the military capacity to defeat Luxembourg, let alone a middle European power? You know, when you turn on a lightbulb, the electricity doesn't come out of the air and collect in the bulb to heat up the element. There is a cause, a reason, and that is the completion of an electric circuit when you flip the switch. 'Fundamentalist Islam' didn't spring out of the ground, nor did it pull its notional antagonisms to western culture out of the air. It arose in response to western adventurism in traditionally Islamic culture. It is a temporal environmental response to a foreign stimulus. There IS no deepseated cultural antagonism because ALL the major monotheisms sprang out of the SAME cultural matrix; their similarities all but outweigh their differences. But you wouldn't know about that because analyzing any problem beyond the junk food fodder of the MSM would rob you of the pleasure of hating somebody, anybody, and the warm glow of righteous indignation it gives you. It is VERY IMPORTANT not to burden this fantasy with too much real data because that would risk the fantasy itself, and this our irrational simply will not tolerate. The thought of 'Islamic' bogeymen overrunning Europe is the stupidest/funniest/most outrageous thing I've heard in months, I have to say, and as entertainment it is truly priceless. As I write, the heroic IDF have just shelled a United Nations observation post, killing the four foreign national soldiers who were sheltering there. The IDF subsequently laid fire on the UN rescue party sent to investigate. The United Nations spokesman, at this stage, has said it was deliberately targetted. In the twenty years of UNIFIL presence in Lebanon there have been to my knowledge no local (Islamic bogeyman) attacks against UNIFIL. But if someone can cite one please do. But keep on talking about Islamic fundamentalism, we are much amused.
From: Dresden, Germany | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
person
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4695
|
posted 25 July 2006 07:49 PM
quote: Originally posted by Sven:
If it makes you feel better, please go on believing that liberal democracy will flourish forever. Personally, I’m not optimistic.
i'm optimistic, hopefully we can get beyond that charade within the next couple of decades...
From: www.resist.ca | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
B.L. Zeebub LLD
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6914
|
posted 25 July 2006 07:51 PM
quote: Originally posted by 500_Apples:
I have never studied academic sociology. When discussing with a sociology major a few years ago, apparently, when you have coexisting cultures in a shared space, you can either have racial genocide or cultural genocide. I should have asked her for a reference. [ 25 July 2006: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]
You should have asked yourself if it's true. Is it? Or is the incommensurability of "cultures" just philosophical cover for the warmongering of the Sons of Strauss and Huntington's bastards? I would counter that assimilation and cross-pollenation of cultures is every bit as prevalent in the historical record.
From: A Devil of an Advocate | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790
|
posted 25 July 2006 09:46 PM
quote: Originally posted by 500_Apples: It's been pointed out that the present rise of islamic fundamentalism is a historical blip due to the previous secular governments... but perhaps that period of secular administration was itself the blip from thousands of years of religion preceding it. I have never studied academic sociology. When discussing with a sociology major a few years ago, apparently, when you have coexisting cultures in a shared space, you can either have racial genocide or cultural genocide. I should have asked her for a reference. [ 25 July 2006: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]
I suggest that your friend the sociology major is probably getting straight C's, if that very simplitic construction of social dyamics is an accurate description of what your friend said.
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323
|
posted 25 July 2006 09:53 PM
quote: Originally posted by 500_Apples: When discussing with a sociology major a few years ago, apparently, when you have coexisting cultures in a shared space, you can either have racial genocide or cultural genocide. I should have asked her for a reference.
I'll be happy to provide you with a reference: "I am pleased to recommend 500_Apples for employment as a sociologist without any qualifications whatsoever."
From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138
|
posted 26 July 2006 08:17 AM
Israel seems to be able to generate some degree of "brownie points" by virtue of giving people the impression that it bends over backwards to minimize civilian casualties and expresses regret over any accidental civilian loss of life and blah blah blah...So, here is my free PR advice to Hezbollah (not that i expect them to pay any attention). Why don't they also start apologizing profusely for any civilian loss of life and put out a press release stating "Our conflict is with the Israeli government and army and not with the people of Israel who we wish to be able to live side by side with in peace and harmony. We sincerely regret and apologize for any loss of life among Israeli civilians who are just innocent bystanders in this unfortunate conflict. We grieve over the loss of life among Israeli civilians, just as much as we grieve over the loss of life in our own community. It is unfortunate that we cannot afford missiles that can be aimed exclusively at military targets, but we also cannot totally give up our struggle either...blah blah blah" Think they might go for it?
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sven
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9972
|
posted 26 July 2006 08:27 AM
quote: Originally posted by Stockholm: Israel seems to be able to generate some degree of "brownie points" by virtue of giving people the impression that it bends over backwards to minimize civilian casualties and expresses regret over any accidental civilian loss of life and blah blah blah...So, here is my free PR advice to Hezbollah (not that i expect them to pay any attention). Why don't they also start apologizing profusely for any civilian loss of life and put out a press release stating "Our conflict is with the Israeli government and army and not with the people of Israel who we wish to be able to live side by side with in peace and harmony. We sincerely regret and apologize for any loss of life among Israeli civilians who are just innocent bystanders in this unfortunate conflict. We grieve over the loss of life among Israeli civilians, just as much as we grieve over the loss of life in our own community. It is unfortunate that we cannot afford missiles that can be aimed exclusively at military targets, but we also cannot totally give up our struggle either...blah blah blah" Think they might go for it?
Counterpoint Exhibit A: Hezbollah uses suicide bombers for the purpose of killing innocent Israeli civilians. There is no doubt that they affirmatively target civilians. So, your “PR advice” would accomplish nothing as such statements would totally lack credibility.
From: Eleutherophobics of the World...Unite!!!!! | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Noise
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12603
|
posted 26 July 2006 08:58 AM
quote: Hezbollah uses suicide bombers for the purpose of killing innocent Israeli civilians.
Err, no... They use rockets and missiles. Suicide bombers were only heavily used on the battlefield when Hizbollah first formed (as they lacked any other weapons). Suicide bombers much more prominent from Hamas now. Mind you, they've used bombs on international targets in the past (not sure if they were suicide bombings mind you)
From: Protest is Patriotism | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938
|
posted 26 July 2006 10:36 AM
quote: Originally posted by Stockholm: Keep in mind that Hezbollah has "proudly" (sic.) taken responsibility for blowing up a Jewish community centre in Buenos Aires that killed almost 100 people a few years back and i'm sure there are many other examples.
Actually, although it's likely Hezbollah was behind it, they have never claimed responsibility. quote: Iran has repeatedly and vehemently denied any involvement in the attack. Last November, an Argentine prosecutor said a member of the Islamic militant group, Hezbollah, was behind the attack and had been identified in a joint effort by Argentine intelligence and the FBI. But Hezbollah said that the man, Ibrahim Hussein Berro, had died in southern Lebanon while fighting Israel.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5190892.stm
From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518
|
posted 26 July 2006 03:46 PM
The case of the car bombing in Argentina which destroyed the Jewish Community Centre and killed one hundred or so people, is typical of Argentina.Typical because, as soon as their Intelligence Police get involved in an investigation, all certainty evaporates. No sooner is Iran blamed by the prosecution, than someone inside will leak it that "really" it was Syria, which had "secretly funded President Menem's campaign for Argentine President". Then someone else will say, no, really it was Libya. And so on. The one clear fact, though, is that officially, Argentina thinks it was Iran/Hezbollah, and IRan has refused to cooperate in the investigation. http://www.seprin.com/informes/amia.htm
From: toronto | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138
|
posted 27 July 2006 05:21 AM
There is a big difference between going to great lengths to make sure that as many civilians as possible are killed even in the absence of any military targets and having there be some civilian deaths in a war zone.Why doesn't Hezbollah apologize for the civilain loss of life in bombings they commit? Its clear that if Hezbollah had access to the kind of firepower that Israel has, we'd be counting Israeli and Jewish civilian casualties around the world in the hundreds of THOUSANDS and not in the dozens.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Merowe
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4020
|
posted 27 July 2006 09:33 AM
quote: Originally posted by Stockholm: There is a big difference between going to great lengths to make sure that as many civilians as possible are killed even in the absence of any military targets and having there be some civilian deaths in a war zone.Why doesn't Hezbollah apologize for the civilain loss of life in bombings they commit? Its clear that if Hezbollah had access to the kind of firepower that Israel has, we'd be counting Israeli and Jewish civilian casualties around the world in the hundreds of THOUSANDS and not in the dozens.
Ah, it's to laugh. 'Some civilian deaths in a war zone' - presumably its a war zone because Israel sees fit to fly over it and drop bombs, but when Hezbollah lobs missiles, that is somehow different. Not a war zone. The vast majority of casualties in Lebanon are civilians. Good luck in a court of law with the line, 'well, we were deliberately NOT targetting civilians'. Of the fraction of that body count suffered by Israel, 50% are SOLDIERS. Which suggests that, beyond obvious - and understandable if regrettable - reprisal attacks, Hezbollah initially confined their targets to military, but expanded as the Lebanese civilian catastrophe became apparent. 'Why doesn't Hezbollah apologize for civilian deaths'? Because that level of cynical hypocrisy seems to be the preserve of the Israelis. If Hezbollah had the kind of firepower Israel had, Israel wouldn't have just bombed Lebanon into the fucking stone age. Pa-fucking-thetic. I don't know what you're smoking, but as far as I can tell, in Stock-world, white is black and black is white. And you're welcome to it.
From: Dresden, Germany | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Noise
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12603
|
posted 27 July 2006 09:59 AM
Stockholm... Civilian Hizbollah suporters might fit into the group you've described here... But they are not the only ones being targetted. Groups of people, Sunni and Christian, whom originally supported action vs Hizbollah, have seen their homes and businesses destroyed as well.If Israel was just targetting Hizbollah, I doubt this outcry would exist to this level (I sure wouldn't)... But they are not. The actions of Israel vs Hizbollah in many ways are justifiable (although contradictory at times)... The problem is Israel isn't just targetting Hizbollah, they are targetting all Lebanese citizens regardless. How many civilians died because Israel felt the apartment they were in had Hizbolalh miliants in the basement? Was Israel in the right (and obvisouly justified because Hizbollah is doing it too^^) to kill all these civilians because their intel placed Hizbollah resources in the building? Can I not use the same logic to nuke the Earth cause somewhere theres gotta be some Hizbolalh supporters and that'd sure teach em! [ 27 July 2006: Message edited by: Noise ]
From: Protest is Patriotism | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
otter
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12062
|
posted 27 July 2006 12:30 PM
It is indeed symbolic that there is so much rhetoric in threads about the middle east that keep throwing the terms 'arab' and israeli' around as if every person bearing these titles is lockstep in line with the brutaility that is being perpetrated there.In fact, it is factions within these identities that are behind the mayhem, while the vast majority of citizens on both sides are simply horrified by the conflict and would prefer to just live in peace.
From: agent provocateur inc. | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885
|
posted 31 July 2006 09:42 AM
quote: Originally posted by Stockholm: There is a big difference between going to great lengths to make sure that as many civilians as possible are killed even in the absence of any military targets and having there be some civilian deaths in a war zone.Why doesn't Hezbollah apologize for the civilain loss of life in bombings they commit? Its clear that if Hezbollah had access to the kind of firepower that Israel has, we'd be counting Israeli and Jewish civilian casualties around the world in the hundreds of THOUSANDS and not in the dozens.
You actually believe when a military group apologizes for the mass killing of civilians? I don't. At least, I don't until some action (i.e. arrest and prosecution) is taken against the people responsible for the deaths. Without such, an apology is hollow and worthless. Why should Hezbollah's actions excuse the IDF's targetting of Lebanese civilians? Your question makes no sense. It leads to this: "Hezbollah targets civilians, therefore the IDF should too." Madness.
From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
B.L. Zeebub LLD
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6914
|
posted 31 July 2006 03:27 PM
quote: Originally posted by Khimia:
Really? It is Hizbullah that has no respect for Arab or Muslim lives given that they callously and deliberately use innocent civilians for protection and in fact consider a muslims civilians death a form of martyrdom for the cause.
Prove it. And I don't mean parrot all the talking points of IDF PR flacks, or the usual "commentary" making its way around the internet and MSM. This meme got legs last week just as (surprise, surprise) Israel came under attack for targetting civilians - AND ADMITTING TO IT! I'm talking specific, objective evidence of Hizbollah using civilians as shields. Second, could you please provide specific evidence that Hizbollah fighters feel that civilians dying is good thing.
From: A Devil of an Advocate | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sven
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9972
|
posted 31 July 2006 03:30 PM
quote: Originally posted by kropotkin1951: If Hezbollah had the type of firepower that Israel does there would be few civilian deaths because Israel would not be attacking either Lebanon or the Occupied Territories. It is the weakness of their enemies that allows Israel to committ war crimes.
I’m not sure that is necessarily the case. If Hezbollah had the kind of firepower that Israel has (i.e., nuclear weapons) and if Hezbollah was making cross-border incursions and firing rockets into Israel, do you think that Israel would just such attacks continue without any response? Or, would they use conventional weapons to attack Hezbollah to stop the attacks on Israel as they are doing now? I think it’s the latter. And, Hezbollah would not likely strike Israel with nuclear weapons (in retaliation for Israel’s killing of several hundred civilians) because Israel would kill millions (in Lebanon, Syria and Iran) in response to a nuclear attack by Hezbollah. So, I don't thinks that Hezbollah's relative military weakness is what's driving Israel's action. Israel wants to Hezbollah attacks to stop...permanently.
From: Eleutherophobics of the World...Unite!!!!! | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
kropotkin1951
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2732
|
posted 01 August 2006 11:37 AM
Fascinating to start the history of Israel and Lebanon from two weeks ago, I guess nothing else has happened. Out of nowhere Israel was attacked. Its not like they have bombed targets inside Lebanon for years and illegally have kidnapped Palestians and held and tortured them without trial.There are two sides to this and neither is without blood on their hands. Maybe it is time for some Israeli's and their supporters to look in the mirror. After at least three decades of trying to kill all of the 'radicals" who oppose the Israeli state you are surrounded by countries were 35 to 60 percent of the population hates you. You are now creating a whole new generation of Lebanese who hate you for killing innocent civilians. They don't care about your history lesson they care about their families that have been murdered. Many of them would have not supported Hizbollah a month ago and were desperately trying to rebuild a war ravaged country. Murderous indiscriminate reprisals against civilians is not working and it will never work. Edited to remove tuypos [ 01 August 2006: Message edited by: kropotkin1951 ]
From: North of Manifest Destiny | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|