15
   

ISRAEL - IRAN - SYRIA - HAMAS - HEZBOLLAH - WWWIII?

 
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Sep, 2006 08:57 am
Foxfyre wrote:
I am going to put Revel and Freeduck's vote down as Israel is not allowed to do anything. So far neither of them have acknowledged that Israel was allowed to do anything and they don't seem to understand that Israel was not bombing Lebanon at the time the rocket attacks started.

It would seem to me that the reasonable way to look at this is that if Hezbollah had not fired rockets at Israel, Israel would not have bombed Lebanon. It would seem to me that Israel was going about its business and wasn't bothering anybody until Hizbollah initiated hostilities.

But somehow, some people are simply not capable of seeing that simple truth.

If Israel had not attempted to rescue its kidnapped soldiers, then there would have been no problem.

And there you have it. It was all Israel's fault from the beginning.


If you can show me how targeting civilian infrastructure constituted either rescuing kidnapped soldiers or rocket attack prevention, then I will be happy to engage with you on this subject.

According to AI, both Hezbollah and Israel have the right and repsonsibility to defend their own people while making sure to take care to limit civilian casualties on the other side. It is well documented that the very nature of the weaponry that Hezbollah used was a crime. (So to flip your question over, "what CAN Hezbollah do in this war if all they have is Katyusha's?" Nobody will answer that because that's not our problem.) It is also well documented that Israel targeted civilian infrastructure and did not take care to limit civilian casualties.

I am not required to give you a list of things that ARE legal in order to point out that something is not legal. It can be argued that Hezbollah fired rockets first, but no timeline has accurately shown that. It's not clear, even to you, whether they fired before or after Israeli troops entered Lebanon. It is however very clear that the purpose of the war against Lebanon was not to stop Katyusha attacks but to destroy Hezbollah and possibly to get the kidnapped soldiers back. Therefore, you might as well ask "what CAN Israel do to blow more bubbles if they aren't allowed to destroy Lebanese infrastructure" since they are both equally related to the intent of the operation.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Sep, 2006 09:06 am
No, you're not required to give me a list of things that are legal or a list of anything at all.

But we're discussing a particular issue and what is and is not legal is definitely a part of it.

Again, if it is my neighborhood, my family, my friends, neighbors, etc. who are being repeatedly shelled with illegal rockets, I don't give a flying fig what my government does, wthin reason, to stop those rockets. And if it does it and minimizes loss of innocent life to the other side as much as possible, then that is a very good thing. I believe Israel did that.

I submit that AI nor any who are condemning Israel on this issue have provided Israel ANY other means to protect its civilians other than exactly what Israel was doing. The only other option Israel had was just taking whatever the terrorists decide to do and respond in no way at all.

I think the latter option is not acceptable and I would not accept it as a choice my govenrment should make. I think it is entirely unreasonable to expect the Israeli govenrment to make that choice as well.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Sep, 2006 10:38 am
Again, the actions that Israel took were not intended to stop rocket attacks. Period. If you submit that the law is not applicable in cases of self-defense, well, then there are a lot of terrorists who are no longer terrorists. If the law does not apply to Israel then it does not apply to Hezbollah -- who can also claim that what they were doing was necessary to stop rocket attacks and a ground invasion.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Sep, 2006 10:40 am
Foxfyre wrote:
I submit that AI nor any who are condemning Israel on this issue have provided Israel ANY other means to protect its civilians other than exactly what Israel was doing. The only other option Israel had was just taking whatever the terrorists decide to do and respond in no way at all.


This is utter horseshit--but it is evident why it is essential to your feeble argument. Israel could have negotiated the release of a number of the thousands of Lebanese who are in their prisons for the two IDF members who were kidnapped, as they have done in the past, and as was likely the object of Hezbollah in the raid. They could have continued to negotiate in good faith for the return of Shebaa Farms, as Hezbollah has been demanding, and as Syria was willing to do, as shown by their having enaged in negotiations with Israel over the Shebaa Farms issue.

If Israel was certain that only direct military attack was the only viable option, they could have targeted Hezbollah, instead of declaring at the outset that the Lebanon as a nation was responsible and would pay the price. There was no need to blockade the country and attack the airport in Beirut, nor to drop cluster bombs indiscriminately all over Hell's half-acre.

But it is essential to your feeble apologia for absolutely any action of the Israeli government to assert that they could not have acted differently than they did, because you simply refuse to make a distinction between Israel and the policies and actions of any particular government. Otherwise, how could you whine that those with whom you disagree are anti-Israeli, unless you forward the proposition that Israel and the policies and actions of any particular government are one and the same.

Israel could have taken any number of steps to isolate Hezbollah and attack it specifically, it could have returned the Shebaa Farms in good faith, it could have released hundreds, even thousands of incarcerated Lebanese who have never been linked to Hezbollah--all actions which would have undercut the meager support which Hezbollah had previously been able to claim. Instead, that idiot Olmert and his stumble-bum admininstration have likely increased the profile and support of Hezbollah in the Lebanon.

Now tell me again that i'm anti-Israeli--after all, i criticized Olmert and his government.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Sep, 2006 11:25 am
By the same token, Hezbollah could have avoided the whole affair by not kidnapping the IDF forces and not forcing Israel to react the way it did.

The fault lies with Hezbollah for the entire mess.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Sep, 2006 01:08 pm
FreeDuck wrote:
Again, the actions that Israel took were not intended to stop rocket attacks. Period. If you submit that the law is not applicable in cases of self-defense, well, then there are a lot of terrorists who are no longer terrorists. If the law does not apply to Israel then it does not apply to Hezbollah -- who can also claim that what they were doing was necessary to stop rocket attacks and a ground invasion.


The initial action Israel took was to rescue its kidnapped soldiers. All subsequent action was in response to the rocket attacks and was all targeted at the launchers, the weapon stockpiles, the supply routes replinishing the stockpiles, and the terrorists themselves.

If that is not self defense against the thousands of rockets that Hezbollah launched over a period of weeks, I don't know what else you would call it.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Sep, 2006 02:44 pm
Israel, over time, captured hundreds of Hezbollah terrorists who were killing or attempting to kill Israeli people.

Lebanon's government, over time, harbored Hezbollah.

Lebanon's government, over time, harbored Hezbollah's rocket sites.

Lebanon's civilians, over time, harbored Hezbollah.

Lebanon's civilians, over time, harbored Hezbollah's rocket sites.

Hezbollah attacked Israel, captured two Israeli soldiers, and demanded that Israel release its hundreds of captured Hezbollah prisoners in return for Hezbollah releasing its two captured Israeli soldiers.

Israel counterattacked Lebanon.

Hezbollah counterattacked Israel's counterattack by firing rockets into Israel.

Israel counterattacked Hezbollah's counterattack to Israel's counterattack by bombing Lebanon.

A ceasefire was eventually negotiated.

Clearly, Hezbollah could have avoided the whole thing by not capturing the two Israeli soldiers.

Clearly, Israel could have gained return of the two captured Israeli soldiers by releasing its hundreds of captured Hezbollah terrorists to Hezbollah.
-------------------------------------------------------------

I think Israel would have been crazy to release its hundreds of captured Hezbollah terrorists to Hezbollah which has repeatedly declared its objective to be the removal of Israel from Palestine.

I think Israel is afraid of the harm Hezbollah can do to its people.

I think Hezbollah is crazy.

I think Hezbollah is criminally insane.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Sep, 2006 03:14 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
All subsequent action was in response to the rocket attacks and was all targeted at the launchers, the weapon stockpiles, the supply routes replinishing the stockpiles, and the terrorists themselves.


But that's just not true or we would not see such widespread damage and we would not see things like power plants and gas stations and water treatment plants targeted. Israel targeted Lebanese infrastructure -- something they announced they would do, even ican admits this on both counts.

Yes, McG, Hezbollah started the whole mess, it's true. So we're down to the "he hit me first" argument. Yes, they are responsible for kidnapping the soldiers and for anything else they did, but that does not absolve Israel of their responsibility to abide by international law.

Ican, you do know that "criminally insane" means that one can not be held responsible for his/her actions, righ? Setting aside, for a minute that it is questionable whether a non-human entity like an organization can actually be insane. Nevertheless, you are always good for a laugh.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Sep, 2006 03:45 pm
FreeDuck wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
All subsequent action was in response to the rocket attacks and was all targeted at the launchers, the weapon stockpiles, the supply routes replinishing the stockpiles, and the terrorists themselves.


But that's just not true or we would not see such widespread damage and we would not see things like power plants and gas stations and water treatment plants targeted. Israel targeted Lebanese infrastructure -- something they announced they would do, even ican admits this on both counts.

Yes, McG, Hezbollah started the whole mess, it's true. So we're down to the "he hit me first" argument. Yes, they are responsible for kidnapping the soldiers and for anything else they did, but that does not absolve Israel of their responsibility to abide by international law.

Ican, you do know that "criminally insane" means that one can not be held responsible for his/her actions, righ? Setting aside, for a minute that it is questionable whether a non-human entity like an organization can actually be insane. Nevertheless, you are always good for a laugh.


Any self-righteous expounding on legalities, human rights, war crimes, etc. sound utterly silly when they come from people who are quick to condemn Israel but are utterly unable to say what Israel could have legally done to stop the rocket attacks. Until you can do that, I will continue to see Israel as the good guys and Hizbollah as the bad guys in this conflict.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Sep, 2006 03:48 pm
emphasis added

Quote:

http://www.cfr.org/publication/9155/

What is Hezbollah?
Hezbollah is a Lebanese umbrella organization of radical Islamic Shiite groups and organizations. It opposes the West, seeks to create a Muslim fundamentalist state modeled on Iran, and is a bitter foe of Israel. Hezbollah, whose name means “party of God,” is a terrorist group believed responsible for nearly 200 attacks since 1982 that have killed more than 800 people, according to the Terrorism Knowledge Base. Experts say Hezbollah is also a significant force in Lebanon’s politics and a major provider of social services, operating schools, hospitals, and agricultural services, for thousands of Lebanese Shiites. It also operates the al-Manar satellite television channel and broadcast station.

What are Hezbollah's origins?
Hezbollah was founded in 1982 in response to the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, and subsumed members of the 1980s coalition of groups known as Islamic Jihad. It has close links to Iran and Syria.

Who are Hezbollah's leaders?
Sheikh Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah is considered the group’s spiritual leader. Imad Fayez Mugniyah is considered the key planner of Hezbollah’s worldwide terrorist operations. During the Lebanese civil war in the 1970s, experts say Mugniyah trained with al-Fatah. When the Palestine Liberation Organization and al-Fatah were expelled from Lebanon by Israeli forces in 1982, Mugniyah joined the newly formed Hezbollah and quickly rose to a senior position in the organization. Hassan Nasrallah is Hezbollah’s senior political leader. Nasrallah was originally a military commander, but his military and religious credentials—he studied in centers of Shiite theology in Iran and Iraq—quickly elevated him to leadership within the group. Experts say he took advantage of rivalries within Hezbollah and the favor of the head of Iran’s theocratic government, Ayatollah Ruhollah Musavi Khomeini, to become the group’s secretary general in 1992, a position he still holds.

Where does Hezbollah operate?
Its base is in Lebanon’s Shiite-dominated areas, including parts of Beirut, southern Lebanon, and the Bekaa Valley. In addition, U.S. intelligence reports say that Hezbollah cells operate in Europe, Africa, South America, and North America. Despite Israel’s 2000 withdrawal from Lebanon, Hezbollah continues to periodically shell Israeli forces in the disputed Shebaa Farms border zone.

Hezbollah has also carried out attacks outside the Middle East. In his September 20, 2001, speech to Congress, President Bush pledged that the U.S.-led war on terror “will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped, and defeated.” Hezbollah’s cells outside the Middle East, its reported involvement in the January 2002 attempt to smuggle a boatload of arms to the Palestinian Authority, and its role in a pair of attacks in Argentina in the early 1990s, imply that it might meet the president’s definition, terrorism experts say. In June 2002, Singapore accused Hezbollah of recruiting Singaporeans in a failed 1990s plot to attack U.S. and Israeli ships in the Singapore Straits. Hezbollah was also among the few terrorist groups that President Bush mentioned by name in his January 2002 State of the Union address.

How big is Hezbollah?
Its core consists of several thousand militants and activists, the U.S. government estimates.

What major attacks is Hezbollah responsible for?
Hezbollah and its affiliates have planned or been linked to a lengthy series of terrorist attacks against the United States, Israel, and other Western targets. These attacks include:

a series of kidnappings of Westerners in Lebanon, including several Americans, in the 1980s; the suicide truck bombings that killed more than 200 U.S. Marines at their barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, in 1983;

the 1985 hijacking of TWA flight 847, which featured the famous footage of the plane’s pilot leaning out of the cockpit with a gun to his head;

two major 1990s attacks on Jewish targets in Argentina—the 1992 bombing of the Israeli Embassy (killing twenty-nine) and the 1994 bombing of a Jewish community center (killing ninety-five).

a July 2006 raid on a border post in northern Israel in which two Israeli soldiers were taken captive. The abductions sparked an Israeli military campaign against Lebanon to which Hezbollah responded by firing rockets across the Lebanese border into Israel.

Does Hezbollah play an active role in the Lebanese politics?
Yes. After the 2005 elections, Hezbollah won fourteen seats in the 128-member Lebanese Parliament. In addition, Hezbollah has two ministers in the government, and a third is endorsed by the group.

Hezbollah did not disarm when it entered Lebanese politics, and experts say the group's new political involvement is not an indication that the group is becoming more moderate.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Sep, 2006 04:08 pm
FreeDuck wrote:

...
Ican, you do know that "criminally insane" means that one can not be held responsible for his/her actions, right?

Wrong!

One can be incarcerated until pronounced by a legally designated authority to be cured of one's criminal insanity . Victims threatened by the criminally insane can legally defend themselves against the criminally insane--including killing the criminally insane in self-defense--when their lives are threatened..


Setting aside, for a minute that it is questionable whether a non-human entity like an organization can actually be insane.

If an organization acts insane, it is insane! When all the members of an organization together act insane, the organization acts insane.

Nevertheless, you are always good for a laugh.

You too! Laughing
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Sep, 2006 04:20 pm
FreeDuck wrote:

...
Yes, McG, Hezbollah started the whole mess, it's true. So we're down to the "he hit me first" argument. Yes, they are responsible for kidnapping the soldiers and for anything else they did, but that does not absolve Israel of their responsibility to abide by international law.



I agree!

Quote:
UN CHARTER Article 51
Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defense shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.


Israel abided by international law. It defended itself the best way it could.

Civilians like Lebanese civilians who harbor violators of international law are violators of international law.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Sep, 2006 12:16 am
From the Independent's report Deadly harvest: The Lebanese fields sown with cluster bombs:

Quote:
Why did the Israeli army do it? The number of cluster bombs fired must have been greater than 1.2 million because, in addition to those fired in rockets, many more were fired in 155mm artillery shells. One Israeli gunner said he had been told to "flood" the area at which they were firing but was given no specific targets. M. Gras, who personally defuses 160 to 180 bomblets a day, says this is the first time he seen cluster bombs used against heavily populated villages.
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Sep, 2006 12:54 am
I read that too, Walter

"The war in Lebanon has not ended. Every day, some of the million bomblets which were fired by Israeli artillery during the last three days of the conflict kill four people in southern Lebanon and wound many more.

The casualty figures will rise sharply in the next month as villagers begin the harvest, picking olives from trees whose leaves and branches hide bombs that explode at the smallest movement. Lebanon's farmers are caught in a deadly dilemma: to risk the harvest, or to leave the produce on which they depend to rot in the fields."

Spin that, Foxy and friends, and tell us again how reasonable and measured Israel is.
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Sep, 2006 05:24 am
What every A2K conservative dreams of; dead Muslims.

Pictures of the Sabra-Shatila Massacre.

http://sabbah.biz/mt/archives/2006/09/15/sabra/
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Sep, 2006 05:52 am
xingu wrote:
What every A2K conservative dreams of; dead Muslims.

Pictures of the Sabra-Shatila Massacre.

http://sabbah.biz/mt/archives/2006/09/15/sabra/

Can't you argue on the basis of our stated opinions, without putting words in our mouth? Guess not.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Sep, 2006 06:08 am
McGentrix wrote:
By the same token, Hezbollah could have avoided the whole affair by not kidnapping the IDF forces and not forcing Israel to react the way it did.

The fault lies with Hezbollah for the entire mess.


No, the fault of Hezbollah extends to creating a situation in which the Israeli government felt obliged to react. You can't absolve the Israeli government of the responsibility for over-reacting in terms of their attack on Lebanese civilians, and you can't avoid the conclusion that the Israeli government's reaction not only failed of its object of destroying Hezbollah, but, in fact probably increased support for a terrorist ogranization which previously had had only marginal support in the Lebanon.

If someone attacks you in the street, you still don't have the right to beat him into insensibility just because he embarrassed you by slapping you in front of your friends. You would still be liable for your actions. In the case of Israel, they have not only made their citizens safer, they have increased the degree of risk for their citizens. They have also eroded the already low esteem which they had in the international comunity, and have probably lost a good deal of support among well-meaning citizens in the industrial West.

You can attempt to warp a description of these events and their consequences to suit your right-wing agenda to your heart's content. It won't change the negative consequences which will result for Israel due to the bad judgment and incompetence of Olmert's government.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Sep, 2006 06:38 am
Everybody is still beating up on Israel and I still don't see much condemnation of Hezbollah for starting the war in the first place and subsequently firing up to 4000 rockets trying to injure and kill Israeli civilians.

I don't know whether Israel used illegal weapons. They say they did not. But the idea of 'excessive' or 'disproportionate' response is ridiculous. When you have an enemy trying its damndest to maim and kill you, you do whatever is necessary to stop it. Some of you seem to think Israel was only allowed to return one shot for one shot. I am of the school that if you're going to fight a war, you do it with overwhelming force, end it as quickly as possible, and then everybody goes home.

If Israel used illegal weapons, then yes they should be criticized for that. They say they didn't.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/757245.html

http://www.irinnews.org/report.asp?ReportID=54822&SelectRegion=Middle_East&SelectCountry=LEBANON

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/08/24/1425218

The larger picture remains:

1) If Hezbollah had not attacked, there would have been no weapons used at all.

2) If the UN "peacekeepers" had done their job according to the UN resolution, there would have been no weapons used at all.

3) As long as organizations like Hezbollah continue to exist, innocent people will continue to be traumatized, maimed, and killed.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Sep, 2006 06:43 am
What?! You mean the arabs will hate Israel MORE? How does one do that? Maybe they wish them "deader"?

Why is it so difficult for some people to simply admit hezbollah was at fault, they shouldn't have stung Israel and they were wrong? Instead we get some pseudo-morality lecture about how Israel will really be hated now? That Israel will be sorry now!

I am sure that Israel is in no more danger now then it was before Hezbollah decided to overstep their boundaries.
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Sep, 2006 06:52 am
So far, I see you have avoided answering the point that just before the ceasefire, Israel seeded Labanese fields with clusterbombs, 30% of which are designed to have delayed explosion, and will last for years.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Israel's Reality - Discussion by Miller
THE WAR IN GAZA - Discussion by Advocate
Israel's Shame - Discussion by BigEgo
Eye On Israel/Palestine - Discussion by IronLionZion
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 1.01 seconds on 12/23/2024 at 06:42:19