The Middle East part 2

[mattxr 9]

this was from the bbc news website.

Quote[/b] ]More than 54 civilians, at least 34 of them children, have been killed in a town in south Lebanon in the deadliest Israeli strike of the conflict so far.

Displaced families had been sheltering in the basement of a house in Qana, which was crushed after a direct hit.

Lebanon's prime minister denounced "Israeli war criminals" and cancelled talks with the US secretary of state.

Israel said it regretted the incident - but added that civilians had been warned to flee the village.

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said Israel would "continue to act with no hesitation against Hezbollah" which has been firing rockets into Israel from southern Lebanon.

Attack condemned

Hundreds of Lebanese protesters staged a violent demonstration, ransacking the UN headquarters in Beirut, chanting slogans against the US and Israel and in support of the Hezbollah militants.

Lebanese soldiers are protecting the building.

Several countries have condemned the attack and renewed their calls for an immediate ceasefire - opposed by Israel, the US and UK.

Why the hell does our priminister [uk] suck up to G.W.Bush.. I think im well going to assinate them both i hate them soo much GGRR TONY BLAIR IS A FUCKING A*S LICKER!!!!

[Supah 0]

Israel have failed to follow several other UN resolutions. It's a fucking disaster when Lebanon does't follow the resolution, but when Israel doesn't...

That knife cuts both ways just as hard. Whenever Israel does follow UN resolutions it is met with a situation in which the Arabs only see that as victory for them and demand more and more compromises from Israel while totally ignoring the fact that they have to do their part of the resolutions and a total apathy of the UN to do anything to force the Arabs to comply.

Quote[/b] ]It doesn't matter how many losses Israel have taken up through the years, it doesn't change the fact that it's wrong to kill civilians and that Israel seems to not care too much if they kill civilians.

If you really think these sort of high morals hold up when it's your people being blown up in busses, bars and restaurant then you need to have reality check. Either Israel goes after the terrorists, which leads to collatoral damage, or they do nothing, showing the terrorists that they can do as they please as long as they hide behind the innocent afterwards.

Quote[/b] ]And the fact that Israel have targeted ambulances, civilians and civilian infrastructure and all the other shit they've done makes Israel a terrorist state.

Quote[/b] ]If Israel did attack only Hizbollah infrastructure it would be ok, problem is they don't. And yes, Hizbollah is to be blamed for using civilians as a shield, but Israel is to be blamed as much for fireing on the shield. When they don't know wether or not they are targeting a position with only terrorists or a position with terrorists and civilians, or even a position with only civilians, they are sinking as low as the terrorists. When you shoot blind at a possible civilians, it's as bad as seeing the civilians, and still shoot.

Again these vehicles and structures are being used by terrorist organisations to hide and supply their field personel. These structures and vehicles are attacked because their used as shields by terrorist organisation. It's not like the IDF are a bunch of Grand Theft Auto addicts with a strange fetish for blowing up ambulances and civilian buildings who just use a terrorist presence as an excuse to kill the innocent. These vehicles and structures are targetted because they have been made targets by the terrorists. The geneva convention, which the arabs love to wave in Israel's face, also forbids to use vehicles marked with the red cross or the red crescent in combat operations, frontline or logistic. Where are the NGO's then with their claims of war crimes?

Quote[/b] ]No I haven't, and I'm sure it's hard. But it's Israels responibility, as the so called democratic state that they are, to don't do mistakes like that. When they target something that doesn't have shit to do with terrorists, it's their fault and they are to blame. They did a shitty job, and it's their responsibility to not do that kind of mistakes.

You think NATO didn't have those kind of fuck ups in Kosovo and the rest of the Yugoslavian campaign? You think the Coalition forces didnt mess up big time during both gulf wars? Do you think this didn't happen during ww2? Vietnam? Korea?ww1? Iran-Iraq?

Quote[/b] ]And what if you were, like many lebanese civilians is, not in a position were you can move or make sure the guy had a unfortunate accident? Like say, if Israel had bombed the infrastructure so bad that you were as likely to die if you tried moving as if you stayed, and that if you tried coming close to the bad guy and hurt him, you would be the one who ended up dead...

Hezbollah can only exist because there is a measure of support from the people of lebanon. Had there been very little support for them in all layers of the population then they would simply not have the ability to survive. No terrorist organisation can exist without a certain (large) amount of popular support. People seem to expect Israel to just "lay down and die when their door is kicked in" was the bob dylan song goes.

[mattxr 9]

Quote[/b] ]If Israel did attack only Hizbollah infrastructure it would be ok, problem is they don't. And yes, Hizbollah is to be blamed for using civilians as a shield, but Israel is to be blamed as much for fireing on the shield. When they don't know wether or not they are targeting a position with only terrorists or a position with terrorists and civilians, or even a position with only civilians, they are sinking as low as the terrorists. When you shoot blind at a possible civilians, it's as bad as seeing the civilians, and still shoot.

Again these vehicles and structures are being used by terrorist organisations to hide and supply their field personel. These structures and vehicles are attacked because their used as shields by terrorist organisation. It's not like the IDF are a bunch of Grand Theft Auto addicts with a strange fetish for blowing up ambulances and civilian buildings who just use a terrorist presence as an excuse to kill the innocent. These vehicles and structures are targetted because they have been made targets by the terrorists. The geneva convention, which the arabs love to wave in Israel's face, also forbids to use vehicles marked with the red cross or the red crescent in combat operations, frontline or logistic. Where are the NGO's then with their claims of war crimes?

How do the Israel's know that.. They Blow up someones flat, an ambulence gets onto the scean, helps the injured heads towards the hospital and before they know it there blow off the map, the reason like always Terroists were using it..

All the CIVILIANS which are being killed are just dieing at no cost and then Israel gets away with calling the inocent "Terroists"

---------------

I think that if someone was bombing my Citys and killing 'innocent' civilians i would join the rebel groups to try and stop them killing my people.

"Never Ending War"

[Supah 0]

And again on CNN now Ben Wedeman reporting from Tyre lebanon who went to the scene says the building was NOT hit directly but rather slid into the crater next to it.

[lwlooz 0]

Glad Kosovo was mentioned.

People should have realized that this "hit the mole" air campaign tactics are pretty much faulty after that. Heck,I could be wrong , but that is just my opinion on this tactics.

Sure Isreal doesn't intentionally target civilian,civilian structures or UN personell,posts and convoys,but they sure don't give a fuck if anything of the above gets hit. I also assume the isreali pilots are so full of hate that they don't do much collateral damage calculation.

Probably the saddest part of this is that all the deaths happening right now are completly in vain, you don't destroy a terrorist organization by supllying them with a mass amount of new recruits.

All we now can do is see the death-count raising and wait until the pressure is high enough that the USA actually want to enforce a cease-fire.

[deanosbeano 0]

there unreatful bastards huh, you tried to make them a nice crater and just because it was next to the building and killed 54 people and including 30 something children, the bastards complain, what an ungreatful world we live in. its always israel fault huh ? well I am sorry but this time it is i have run out of any sympathy for israel i had, i simply cannot sit here and watch these children die and not say what i think. those israeli politicians and idf-af pilots and genreals that carry out these acts of genocide are nothing but cowards, no matter what high moraility they think they had, to me they are no different than the scum that send rockets to israel , they are infact now shown to be one and the same.

[Supah 0]

there unreatful bastards huh, you tried to make them a nice crater and just because it was next to the building and killed 54 people and including 30 something children, the bastards complain, what an ungreatful world we live in. its always israel fault huh ? well I am sorry but this time it is i have run out of any sympathy for israel i had, i simply cannot sit here and watch these children die and not say what i think. those israeli politicians and idf-af pilots and genreals that carry out these acts of genocide are nothing but cowards, no matter what high moraility they think they had, to me they are no different than the scum that send rockets to israel , they are infact now shown to be one and the same.

Perhaps you should try and calm down a little before posting. Collateral damage does not constitute a genocide. You are sounding like the Lebanese president who just claimed on CNN the IDF had "Purposfully butchered all the lebanese people". Now you are not telling me there just 750 people in lebanon? Where did I say they were ungratefull? I am just saying that this was not a intentional strike on civilians but most likely a strike on a hezbollah target near a civilian structure. Also I get the feeling you had little sympathy to loose to begin with.

[Garcia 0]

Quote[/b] ]If you really think these sort of high morals hold up when it's your people being blown up in busses, bars and restaurant then you need to have reality check. Either Israel goes after the terrorists, which leads to collatoral damage, or they do nothing, showing the terrorists that they can do as they please as long as they hide behind the innocent afterwards.

I would support actions against the terrorist oraganization, but I wouldn't support my army blowing up shitloads of civilians.

Quote[/b] ]Again these vehicles and structures are being used by terrorist organisations to hide and supply their field personel. These structures and vehicles are attacked because their used as shields by terrorist organisation. It's not like the IDF are a bunch of Grand Theft Auto addicts with a strange fetish for blowing up ambulances and civilian buildings who just use a terrorist presence as an excuse to kill the innocent. These vehicles and structures are targetted because they have been made targets by the terrorists. The geneva convention, which the arabs love to wave in Israel's face, also forbids to use vehicles marked with the red cross or the red crescent in combat operations, frontline or logistic. Where are the NGO's then with their claims of war crimes?

No matter how many times Hizbollah have used vehicles marked with red crosses, Israel still shouldn't target actual red cross ambulances. And Israel doesn't blow up infrastructure because Hizbollah was present, they blow them up because Hizbollah may use them, and then they blow up the civilians that gets stuck in the area, and then blames the civilians because they should have gotten out using the blown up infrastructure.

IDF blew up a whole apparmentbuilding just because a Hizbollah guy had a apparment there. Of course he wasn't in there. If you really think things like that is going to help Israel you need a reality check. When you keep blowing up civilians and civilian infrastructure, no matter how much the terrorists use it, you generate more support for the terrorists, and therefor feeding the terrorists with soldiers and support and working against your own goal.

Quote[/b] ]You think NATO didn't have those kind of fuck ups in Kosovo and the rest of the Yugoslavian campaign? You think the Coalition forces didnt mess up big time during both gulf wars?Do you think this didn't happen during ww2? Vietnam? Korea?ww1? Iran-Iraq?

Of course they did, but the difference is that Israel doesn't give a shit if they kill civilians, and they certainly kill more civilians than any other nation have done during other conflicts lately. And just to let you know, I don't support the killing of civilians in other wars.

And comparing this to WWII and WWI doesn't give much sence, as at that time they didn't have the kind of weapons Israel have now.

Besides, if you haven't forgotten, this is a war between a country and a terrorist organization, while the conflicts you listed were between countries.

Quote[/b] ]Hezbollah can only exist because there is a measure of support from the people of lebanon. Had there been very little support for them in all layers of the population then they would simply not have the ability to survive. No terrorist organisation can exist without a certain (large) amount of popular support. People seem to expect Israel to just "lay down and die when their door is kicked in" was the bob dylan song goes.

And where do you think that support comes from? The ass of the Lebanese prime minister? Bushs nose? Hizbollah was formed in 1982 to fight Israel during their occupation. The support for Hizbollah is generated by Israels constant killing of civilians in different areas, mainly Palestine, and now, of course, also Lebanon.

What you don't seem to give a shit about, is the fact that, even though Israel have the right to defend themself, they do it by hitting civilians more than terrorists and they break lots of international laws on how to fight a war. You whine about this is because of Hizbollah actions, but you seem to fail to understand that, as a terrorist organization, nobody expect Hizbollah to follow these laws, while as a recognized modern democatic state, Israel is expected to follow these laws. When they don't, they lower themself to the terrorist organizations level.

I fully understand that Israel want to stop Hizbollahs attacks, but I also understand that Israels actions apparently doesn't work very well. Hizbollah is still able to fire 100 rockets each day into Israel. Israel have killed hundreds of civilians and ruined the infrastructure in south-lebanon, but Hizbollah doesn't seem to have lost much strenght. Also, the killing of civilians certainly generate a lot of support for Hizbollah. You say that Hizbollah can only live because of the support in the lebanese people. Yes, that's the only reason why they exist, but much of that support is caused by Israels actions. Israel did right to react to the attacks by Hizbollah, but they reacted in a fucked up way.

[Donnervogel 0]

And again on CNN now Ben Wedeman reporting from Tyre lebanon who went to the scene says the building was NOT hit directly but rather slid into the crater next to it.

Well that doesn't really change the outcome. They probably bombed something that they identified as an hezbollah rocket launching site or wahtever next to the house. Or maybe they just missed the real target. I don't know exactly but it doesn't matter. Israel doesn't care much about colateral dammage and they bomb everything no matter how close or not it is to civilians. That's the problem. When their objective is to root out hezbollah they won't archieve any of this with air strikes anyway. They gonna have to send troops in. And I somewhat hope they do that because troops *can* assess the situation better and thus sprare civillians cassualties better (if they want at least).

I don't accuse the Israelis of deliberatly targetting those civilians (at least with the info I have so far) but they are careless idiots. No matter if this was an accident or not. It is a huge boost for hesbollah and a massive "Propaganda victory" for them. Israel is not gonna lose this war militarily but they're gonna not gonna archieve their objective because with those idiotic actions they only fuel the hatred against Israel and the support for those terror organisation. Most of the lebanese now support hesbollah and their actions which is a dramatic change of the situation considering that before this crisis hesbollah was losing support on a rapid rate (after their Syrian protegés were thrown out)

Israel will have to pay a lot for this shortsightedness in the long term. This conflict is not going to be solved by killing people. There are more than enough to take their place. The only solution can be to "kill" the support for the terrorists. And this is not done by killing the supporters and anyone near them. This can only be done by changing their minds. And israel is changing a lot of minds... but in the wrong direction.

[Supah 0]

I would support actions against the terrorist oraganization, but I wouldn't support my army blowing up shitloads of civilians.

How very noble of you. I'd like to see you when the situation are real and this question is asked of you ten minutes after you have buried a family member who was killed by a terrorist bomb. Again, the IDF is not targeting civilians for the fun of it, these people are dying because Hezbollah forces are hiding amongst them as a way of blackmailing Israel to not bring them to justice.

Quote[/b] ]

No matter how many times Hizbollah have used vehicles marked with red crosses, Israel still shouldn't target actual red cross ambulances. And Israel doesn't blow up infrastructure because Hizbollah was present, they blow them up because Hizbollah may use them, and then they blow up the civilians that gets stuck in the area, and then blames the civilians because they should have gotten out using the blown up infrastructure.

Perhaps you should email your methode of differentiating between an ambulance being used to ferry troops and supplies from a ambulance that isn't being used to do so to the NATO headquarters. They will be highly interested in it.

Quote[/b] ]IDF blew up a whole apparmentbuilding just because a Hizbollah guy had a apparment there. Of course he wasn't in there. If you really think things like that is going to help Israel you need a reality check. When you keep blowing up civilians and civilian infrastructure, no matter how much the terrorists use it, you generate more support for the terrorists, and therefor feeding the terrorists with soldiers and support and working against your own goal.

Again, what choice does Israel have? Just let the terrorists get away with it because they hide amongst the civilian population afterwards? That would be an open invitation to come and kill Israeli's in Israel because once you envoke the magic "O look civilians!" Shield they wont attack you. Ofcourse using non violent means to appease this situation would have been better. Israel did that when they fully complied with UN Resolution 1559 by withdrawing from lebanon. Sadly the other side completely ignored their responsibillities under this resolution and even went on the attack. Apparently Hezbollah only wants to chose the path of violence. Again, How would you want Israel to reply? Enlighten us.

Quote[/b] ]Of course they did, but the difference is that Israel doesn't give a shit if they kill civilians, and they certainly kill more civilians than any other nation have done during other conflicts lately. And just to let you know, I don't support the killing of civilians in other wars.

And comparing this to WWII and WWI doesn't give much sence, as at that time they didn't have the kind of weapons Israel have now.

Again, where do you get this idea that it is the stated goal of this operation to kill as many civilians as possible? Hezbollah is using the population as a shield. If Israel doesn't attack because of this shield Hezbollah is given free reign to attack Israel and if they do Hezbollah uses the images of dead civilians as propaganda in the west. Damned if you do and damned if you don't. In this situation Israel has chosen for its own safety rather then what certain people in the west think.

Quote[/b] ]Besides, if you haven't forgotten, this is a war between a country and a terrorist organization, while the conflicts you listed were between countries.

Here you are making a big mistake. Hezbollah is part of the current lebanese government. When a political party who is actively taking part of the governance of a country uses its armed branch to attack, kill and abduct citizens and armed forces personell of another souvereign nation then this can be seen as an act of war between states.

Quote[/b] ]And where do you think that support comes from? The ass of the Lebanese prime minister? Bushs nose? Hizbollah was formed in 1982 to fight Israel during their occupation. The support for Hizbollah is generated by Israels constant killing of civilians in different areas, mainly Palestine, and now, of course, also Lebanon.

If you think this comes just from Israel's action then you are being a bit short sighted. Radical Islam, Antisemitisme taught from a very early age (I can provide you with lot of nice pictures of arabs bringing the nazi salute etc., mein kampf being a best seller in the arab world), attempts of countries leaders to use Israel as a lightning rod for their own corruption and lack of democratic principles and freedom's and a failure to attain a measure of economic growth that spreads beyond the royal family. Israel's actions in the gaza strip can also be viewed as a response to terrorisme and/or massed military attacks by its neighbours in various previous wars. Chicken and the egg.

Quote[/b] ]What you don't seem to give a shit about, is the fact that, even though Israel have the right to defend themself, they do it by hitting civilians more than terrorists and they break lots of international laws on how to fight a war. You whine about this is because of Hizbollah actions, but you seem to fail to understand that, as a terrorist organization, nobody expect Hizbollah to follow these laws, while as a recognized modern democatic state, Israel is expected to follow these laws. When they don't, they lower themself to the terrorist organizations level.

A nice way to drop your mask. The moment you can't "win" a conversation you call the other person's point of view whining? That says a lot more about you then it says about me. If you fail or refuse to understand the situation Hezbollah's use of civilians as shields places Israel in then you have a very limited empathic ability. It is blackmail of the worst kind and you simply can not give into blackmail or you will forever be the victim of it. About your claims that it is ok for Hezbollah to kill civilians and use them as shields because their terrorists .... if the rules don't apply to everyone they apply to noone. If your enemy fights by the rules then you fight him by the rules ... if he doesn't ....

Quote[/b] ]I fully understand that Israel want to stop Hizbollahs attacks, but I also understand that Israels actions apparently doesn't work very well. Hizbollah is still able to fire 100 rockets each day into Israel. Israel have killed hundreds of civilians and ruined the infrastructure in south-lebanon, but Hizbollah doesn't seem to have lost much strenght. Also, the killing of civilians certainly generate a lot of support for Hizbollah. You say that Hizbollah can only live because of the support in the lebanese people. Yes, that's the only reason why they exist, but much of that support is caused by Israels actions. Israel did right to react to the attacks by Hizbollah, but they reacted in a fucked up way.

Apparently you know a better way to respond, please share it with us.

[JdB 151]

Quote[/b] ]If Israel did attack only Hizbollah infrastructure it would be ok, problem is they don't.

Unfortunatly Hezbollah is part of the goverment (they have ministers in the goverment), so targeting the Lebanese infrastructure does mean hitting Hezbollah targets. Preventing the enemy from moving their troops is one of many methods to victory in a war/conflict. Lebanon is pretty mountainous, so blowing up bridges and roads is a smart move.

I don't visit this topic regularly, but where were all the "GODD*MN THOSE [insert name of country]" when terrorists where blowing up busses full of children in Israel? The only response you get from most people to a deliberate terrorist attack on a bus is "rip", but when Israel targets something and a bomb falls the wrong way, or an accident happens, then it's "GODD*MN THOSE ISRAELI'S MURDERERS" etc...

Hezbollah and Hamas target civilians, Israel only hits civilians by accident. Also, could you see the difference between a Hezbollah fighter and an innocent boy? The only difference is a scarf, and an AK47, which can both easily be removed for influencing the public opinion in your favor.

[deanosbeano 0]

Quote[/b] ]Olmert apologized for the Israeli attack.

"I express great sorrow in the name of the state of Israel and the army over the deaths of Lebanese civilians in Qana," Olmert said during Israel's weekly cabinet meeting, according to a participant in the meeting.

"There is nothing further from our thoughts and our interests than striking civilians. Everyone understands this. When we strike civilians, the world understands this is an exceptional case that does not represent how we act, " Olmert said.

I dont know what papers this guy reads or tv station he watches,but everyone does not see this as an exceptional case at all.altho it is true that everyone understands they do strike civilians.if only there was a field big enough for hezbollah and the idf to go and blow the shit out of eachother without civilians but maybe they would realise that they are so alike they wouldnt fight and let eachother live without robbing land or killing eachothers children.

Quote[/b] ]Perhaps you should try and calm down a little before posting. Collateral damage does not constitute a genocide

the constant bomming of children does.

[scary 0]

just feel sorry for the Israelis that's actually sane enough to see how fucked up Israels actions are...

To be fair to the Israelis their media just doesn't show the results of the attacks in Lebanon in the same way the rest of the world's media - except, perhaps, in the US - does, while they concentrate on the results of Hizbullah attacks. They also have a propaganda heavy, populist government: someone could say they like bacon sandwiches and Olmert will present it as them wanting to destroy Israel. Add to that the uncritical, unwavering US support and it creates a strong victim mentality that is difficult to overcome.

Also, I don't think IDF conscription has a positive effect on either public opinion or IDF competence.

Its time the U.N was disbanded and some powerful organisation was put in place that didnt need the U.S to sanction all its rulings.

If the EU got its act together it would be more than powerful enough to stand up to the US, but that would probably need people to stop reading the Sun/Bild etc. and for Blair to be beaten into submission with his own ego.

But back to the war at the other end of the country: what looks like an interesting documentary on Channel 4 in the UK tomorrow at 20:00 BST 'Judah And Mohammad'.

A review:

The political theorist Michael Ignatieff, writing about the Balkans, said that, 'the past continues to torment because it is not the past. These places are not living in a serial order of time, but a simultaneous one, in which past and present are a continuous, agglutinated mass of distortions, fanatasies, myths and lies'. This idea is perfectly encapsulated in this documentary, an Israeli-Palestinian co-production, filmed over 18 months, which follows the lives of two 15-year-old boys, Judah, an Israeli Jew, and Mohammad, a Palestinian Muslim.

For the first time, the documentary makers have been allowed into Israeli and Palestinian classrooms, which are as rowdy and noisy as anywhere else in the world. The history being taught, however, is unlike any other; nothing is left in the past, and the same events are interpreted completely differently on either side of the wall. Students in schools on both sides are still bitterly angry about events which happened more than 40 years before they were born, apparently regardless of whether their teachers or parents preach tolerance or hatred.

Unsurprising, then, that Judah is anxious to become a fighter pilot in the Israeli army, or that Mohammad attends rallies and demonstrations against the wall and the occupation. Judah watches the news on which children are blown up by suicide bombers and goes to a school were pupils have died. Mohammad is arrested at a demonstration and spends seven days in prison, coming home to a hero's welcome. The surprising thing is that he is not absolutely radicalised by the experience and actually manages to remain a thoughtful engaging young man (which is more than be said for Judah, who, by coincidence, is a cocky little sod).

There is hope to be had, in as much as this film was a co-operative effort between Israelis and Palestinians but,especially given the present context, little else to be cheery about. The divisive education being dished out to the next generation, and their diametrically opposed attitudes, don't suggest that much will change in the region any time soon.

[Donnervogel 0]

Quote[/b] ]If Israel did attack only Hizbollah infrastructure it would be ok, problem is they don't.

Unfortunatly Hezbollah is part of the goverment (they have ministers in the goverment), so targeting the Lebanese infrastructure does mean hitting Hezbollah targets. Preventing the enemy from moving their troops is one of many methods to victory in a war/conflict. Lebanon is pretty mountainous, so blowing up bridges and roads is a smart move.

Your conclusions are wrong. You should read my earlier posts about the situation in Lebanon and the government-hesbollah relation. Or just read up on the topic.

To summarise:

Hesbollah has ministers in the government and it is a strong political party in the country. That does not however mean the Government is a terrorist government. Hesbollah is mainly a political party and takes about 11% of the seats in the parliament of Lebanon (14 out of 128 - the shia colaititon together take about 27 which is about 20%).

Hesbollah's military arms (Al-Muqawama al-Islamiyya) has about 400-3000 fighters depending on what source you take.

Whatever. The situation in Lebaonon is that the country is deeply divided between the main religions there. About 30% Shia, 30% Sunnis and 40% Christians (generalising a bit) and the country just began to get over the trauma of the civil war there.

One of the main problems left over from the period of civil war and the following occupations by israel is that the Shia militia (the military arm of Hesbollah) refused to disarm while the other militias already disarmed. Another problem was the Syrian control over the country until the recent "cedar revolution" in 2005.

The result was tha Syria backed the hesbollah strongly and prevented the Lebanese army to gain sufficent strenght to represent the biggest military power in the country. And on the other side Syria de-facto controled the Lebanese government so until 2005 the Lebanese were unable to disarm the hesbollah.

The problem remained after Syria left because they left the hesbollah behind as a stronger military force than the army. Also aggressive action against hesbollah would have likely been a cause for a renewed civil war.

So the Lebeanese didn't have much choice to hold up the status quo where the hesbollah built almost their own government in parts of southern lebanon with strong control over it.

Knowing the situation you can see that hitting civilian infrastructure all across lebanon is not "htting hesbollah". Hesbollah does not run Lebaonon. Maybe you can get away by hitting some infrastructure in southern lebanon because they most likely are built and maintained by hesbollah. But you still fail to see that also people living in the south and supporting hesbollah are still civillians and not necessary militants (Hesbollah being also a political party) and the main use for bridges and roads is for those civilians. The hesbollah has not much heavy equippment that would depend on those bridges and roads. They mainly consist of light vehicles and people on foot. And during a war it is unwise anyway to move on streets when the enemy got air superiority. So they will likely use alternative routes. Infanct the hesbollah milias will probably be least affected by that dammage.

The main affected are civillians that would maybe like to flee the warzone. But it's kinda hard to get your fully loaded truck (if you can afford one) over destroyed bridges and streets. Also supplying the civillians that can't leave and are stuck in the south will be strongly affected by that dammage.

Also bombing a lot of civilian infrastructure in Beirut is more than questionable. Like the power plants, fuel depots or dropping bombs into populated streets and houses...

Quote[/b] ]Hezbollah and Hamas target civilians, Israel only hits civilians by accident. Also, could you see the difference between a Hezbollah fighter and an innocent boy? The only difference is a scarf, and an AK47, which can both easily be removed for influencing the public opinion in your favor.

I see the difference between a 5 year old girl and a fearsome terrorist though. Not all casualties are civillians but the majority is. And the problem with Israels "accidents" is that they killed multiple times the civilians than the hesbollah rocket attacks did... it's kinda out of proportion.

[Supah 0]

Quote[/b] ]Perhaps you should try and calm down a little before posting. Collateral damage does not constitute a genocide

the constant bomming of children does.

So you call the intifada with its intentional bombing of Israeli Busses a Genocide on the Israeli people too? Or is it only a Genocide when people die because of collaterol damage caused by IDF bombs?

[Garcia 0]

Quote[/b] ]How very noble of you. I'd like to see you when the situation are real and this question is asked of you ten minutes after you have buried a family member who was killed by a terrorist bomb. Again, the IDF is not targeting civilians for the fun of it, these people are dying because Hezbollah forces are hiding amongst them as a way of blackmailing Israel to not bring them to justice.

It's not very noble, it's what I would expect from others if they had to choose between blowing up my country or choose other methods which would cause less damage.

Quote[/b] ]Perhaps you should email your methode of differentiating between an ambulance being used to ferry troops and supplies from a ambulance that isn't being used to do so to the NATO headquarters. They will be highly interested in it.

You seem to refuse to understand that, even though IDF may not be able to see the difference between a ambulance used by Hizbollah or a ambulance used to help wounded people, it is wrong to target the ambulance as long as they don't know for sure that it is a Hizbollah ambulance. If you got a target and you don't know wether or not it is a terrorist or civilian target, it's wrong to blow it up. I would think this was quite obvious...

Quote[/b] ]Again, what choice does Israel have? Just let the terrorists get away with it because they hide amongst the civilian population afterwards? That would be an open invitation to come and kill Israeli's in Israel because once you envoke the magic "O look civilians!" Shield they wont attack you. Ofcourse using non violent means to appease this situation would have been better. Israel did that when they fully complied with UN Resolution 1559 by withdrawing from lebanon. Sadly the other side completely ignored their responsibillities under this resolution and even went on the attack. Apparently Hezbollah only wants to chose the path of violence. Again, How would you want Israel to reply? Enlighten us.

They certainly should not blow up a building because a terrorist may be in there. Neither should they blow up a rocket launcher when it is in the middle of a schoolyard full of kids. I would want Israel to reply in a way were they kill the terrorists, not the civilians. According to reports from Sky News Israel doesn't really hit terrorists much because they blow up the spot after the terrorists have left...

Quote[/b] ]Again, where do you get this idea that it is the stated goal of this operation to kill as many civilians as possible? Hezbollah is using the population as a shield. If Israel doesn't attack because of this shield Hezbollah is given free reign to attack Israel and if they do Hezbollah uses the images of dead civilians as propaganda in the west. Damned if you do and damned if you don't. In this situation Israel has chosen for its own safety rather then what certain people in the west think.

I don't belive that their goal is to kill civilians, but I belive that they don't really care too much if they do kill civilians.

Quote[/b] ]If you think this comes just from Israel's action then you are being a bit short sighted. Radical Islam, Antisemitisme taught from a very early age (I can provide you with lot of nice pictures of arabs bringing the nazi salute etc., mein kampf being a best seller in the arab world), attempts of countries leaders to use Israel as a lightning rod for their own corruption and lack of democratic principles and freedom's and a failure to attain a measure of economic growth that spreads beyond the royal family. Israel's actions in the gaza strip can also be viewed as a response to terrorisme and/or massed military attacks by its neighbours in various previous wars. Chicken and the egg.

Of course support for Hizbollah comes from other sources, but at this point it's likely that most of the support for Hizbollah comes from Israels actions.

Quote[/b] ]A nice way to drop your mask. The moment you can't "win" a conversation you call the other person's point of view whining?

Indeed, it wasn't very serious to use the word whine, and I know I should have used other words

Quote[/b] ]If you fail or refuse to understand the situation Hezbollah's use of civilians as shields places Israel in then you have a very limited empathic ability. It is blackmail of the worst kind and you simply can not give into blackmail or you will forever be the victim of it. About your claims that it is ok for Hezbollah to kill civilians and use them as shields because their terrorists .... if the rules don't apply to everyone they apply to noone. If your enemy fights by the rules then you fight him by the rules ... if he doesn't ....

I don't refuse to understand that, though I am I quite sure Israel could have chosen another approach to this situation that would prove to fit their goal better.

And I've never claimed it's ok for Hizbollah to use civilians as targets, I've said that people don't expect anything else from a terrorist organization. Hizbollahs is wrong when they operate in a way that endanger civilian life, but you don't get suprised when they do. To put it like this, what would you be most suprised of and react most to; if Hizbollah sent suicide bombers to Israel or if Israel sent suicide bombers into Lebanon? The rules apply to everyone, be they a state or a terrorist organization, but you expect a higher level of moral from a democratic state than a terrorist organization.

And if Israel chooses to fight Hizbollah by the rules Hizbollah follows, then Israel loses the card of calling the other side terrorists, because they themself are also terrorists.

Quote[/b] ]Apparently you know a better way to respond, please share it with us.

I won't claim to be a military expert, but I am quite sure that Israel could and should have chosen a different approach to this situation. At this point it seems like their attacks have mostly killed civilians and destroyed the infrastructure in Lebanon, while Hizbollah isn't hurt to much. Their tactics have certainly failed them so far...

And about IDF not hitting the building, according to a sky news reporter on the scene there was no proof of Hizbollah activity in the area, and a they reported the building being hit twice, not the nearby area.

Quote[/b] ]Unfortunatly Hezbollah is part of the goverment (they have ministers in the goverment), so targeting the Lebanese infrastructure does mean hitting Hezbollah targets. Preventing the enemy from moving their troops is one of many methods to victory in a war/conflict. Lebanon is pretty mountainous, so blowing up bridges and roads is a smart move.

Targeting the infrastructure is a usual tactic, yes, but IMO Israel have targeted too much. Also, Israel keep saying that civilian losses isn't their fault because the civilians should have left the area, but their ways out is blown up by IDF...

Quote[/b] ]Hezbollah and Hamas target civilians, Israel only hits civilians by accident. Also, could you see the difference between a Hezbollah fighter and an innocent boy? The only difference is a scarf, and an AK47, which can both easily be removed for influencing the public opinion in your favor.

Honestly, I don't understand how you can "justify" Israel killing innocent people because the terrorists may look like civilians and the civilians may look like terrorists. It's quite obvious (for me at least) that in a situation like that you either think first and act later and risk taking a hit to make sure you don't shoot a little boy, or you act first and think later, and then you bloody hell have to stand up and take the blame when the target did indeed turn out to be a little boy.

[lwlooz 0]

I think it would be very helpful for the discussion if people could stop the silly "The IDF are monsters" or the "Poor Isreal,always being attacked".

The real question I have and I am thankful for the nice posts Donnervogel did, do supporters of this military campaign really think it is doing any good? Especially in the long-term. Secondly, do you really think by not bombing a hisbollah postion right next to a civilian building the isrealis are losing the war? Personally I believe there are huge amount of unnecessary strikes being performed. All following the old myth of surgical airpower that achieves anything

[JdB 151]

Quote[/b] ]And the problem with Israels "accidents" is that they killed multiple times the civilians than the hesbollah rocket attacks did... it's kinda out of proportion.

Ever noticed how a small chestbelt of explosives is a lot smaller then a 500pdr dropped by an aircraft? If terrorists could take larger explosives with them then they would.

Hezbollah gains favor by killing Israeli civilians, Israel only receives blame when they accidentaly kill civilians. From any sane perspective it makes no sense for Israel to be deliberatly targeting civilians, as Hezbollah is doing.

Quote[/b] ]Honestly, I don't understand how you can "justify" Israel killing innocent people because the terrorists may look like civilians and the civilians may look like terrorists.

My point was that almost nothing that you see from either the Israeli, Lebanese or "terrorist" side is unbiased or completely true. An IDF sniper shoots an armed militant, Hezbollah removes the weapon from the militant and suddenly he is "an innocent boy that never hurt anyone in his entire life", with the additional random images of some woman crying.

A good example: a dutch television crew was doing an interview with an elderly Lebanese woman. They ask her "who is to blame for this war?". She responds "both are wrong". At that moment a Hezbollah representative steps up behind the camera crew and forces the woman to blame Israel.

You could almost hear the AK47 being chambered...

[deanosbeano 0]

like i said in a previous posts i cannot seperate israels and hizbollahs actions, to me they are one and the same niether will be satified until the other is blown out of existance and both dont seem to care how many children die to achieve it,you want to persuade me otherwise i gladly will listen read or whatever.but my opinion is formed, but unlike israeli government and hezbollah , i am open minded and maybe i shall change it,who knows.

[mattxr 9]

I see it as both sides are just as bad as each other but the israels should know better.. this is how i see it now..

Hezbollah are terroists, they target civilians, its what they do. that = bad so they should be gotten rid of..

Israel have a modern army they should know better not blow the shit of the country next door "thy shall love their Neighbours" anyways with a modern army and weaponry you shouldnt have to go and blow the shit out of everywhere...

if you look at what the US/UK did in iraq they used the presision weapons on military targets then moved in.. they didnt blow the shit out of the cilvilans trying to get to saddam. yes there was civilan casulitys but at leaste they still have a city to live in..

Both countrys have breached the Genva Convention weather they were signed to it or not and justace must be brought to these people.. and Bush who gives a fuck about his descions.. he shouldnt even be in the EU [uSA Sucks for supplying a country whos actions are wrong] .. and also blair who sucks up to bush.. im sure without blair the uk would be much nicer.

[Stealth3 0]

Whats ironic is that Israeli's started with the sucide bombings when Britain was controling the area. Remember the hotel where an Israeli sucide bomber blew the shit out the British troops there.

Whats also funny is that every sucide bomber in Israel, you seem to mix them up with Hezbolah. How do you know it was a Hezbolah sucide bomer?

People are not mad about what's happening but more about the lies and the scum that the Israeli government is telling the people. No matter what is happeing there is always somebody else to blame and there is always an accident.

You don't see England saying the Dresden bombing was an accident, at least they admit and take responsability. Nothing will bring back the dead but at least take responsability for your actions, don't blame it on somebody else.

Only the US and Israel considers Hezbolah a terrorist organization, and the US considers pretty much everybody that doesn't agree with them terrorists. Look at Chavez, all of the sudden he is a supporter of terrorists. Its all politics.

The US can say, oh the bombing of the military baracks was terrorism, but was it really? The VC used the tactic in vietnam, and I bet they were considered terrorists back then. Only back then the word terrorism had very differnet meaning.

Now whether you consider Hezbolah terrorists or not is up to you. But the fact is that they have a civilian wing and offer a lot of help to the people around them. They built schools, donated to the poor, etc. So saying that they used civilians as shields without proof is kind of arrogant.

I read articles that the IDF used civilians in gaza as shields. Does that mean that everybody in the IDF does it, no? Kind of like the abu abuses in Iraq. Stereotyping isn't good.

I doubt that Hezbolah's goal is to kill Israeli civilians, or the leader wouldn't have appologized when one kid died. Of course there will be casualties because Hezbolah doesn't have much control over their rockets. But pretty much everywhere they fired, they tried to aim for infrastructure (like what the IDF does). Haifa has a lot of infrastructure especially by the port area.

If they wanted to kill civilians they would havei infiltrated futher in the first place and bomed a whole building. Instead they attacked a military outpost.

I wouldn't care if there was a war between the two, but this war is on civilians also. And I wouldn't mind as much if they said other things other than accidents or blame it on somebody else.

As Matt Rochelle said, both countries breaked the Geneva convention, Israel being first to ignore it. So don't even try to argue that.

Also I doubt that you guys know that after Israel withdrew in 2000, they didn't give the Lebanese government maps of where they placed thier mine fields. As a result people to these days die because of the unknown minefields. One of the ceasefire agreements is to provide maps to the minefields.

This war has very deep roots and both sides are at fault, and only when they work together they can solve the problem.

If I go take your backyard by force, place mines, then leave after you retaliate, I bet you will me mad If I dont provide you with a map to remove the mines.

[JdB 151]

Well, from one perspective the Israeli response is excessive, but on the other hand, what else to do?

Israel pulled all it's troops out of all occupied territories and opened a trade route for the Palestinians. Still the terrorists continue to attack Israel in their attempt to destroy Israel (=Judaism). If Israeli doesn't strike back with full force then they show weakness and invite further attacks. If they do then the entire world - some countries blame them for attacking terrorists and Israel is called a warmonger.

No one has ever won a war with one hand tied behind their back. War = civilian casualties, especially when the terrorists you are trying to destroy are hiding behind civilians.

Quote[/b] ]But the fact is that they have a civilian wing and offer a lot of help to the people around them.

To build support for their terrorist actions...

[Donnervogel 0]

Ever noticed how a small chestbelt of explosives is a lot smaller then a 500pdr dropped by an aircraft? If terrorists could take larger explosives with them then they would.

You somehow miss the point there.

How does this justify that Israel goes on killing scores of civilians?

"Because they got bigger guns they may kill more people"? I somehow fail to see how that logic applies to a modern civilised democratic state.

I'm not protecting the Hesbollah. We all know the Hesbollah wants to erase Israel from the map and they would retaliate with more impact if they could. And I even support the Israeli intention to secure their borders and to weaken hisbollah. But IMHO Israel is totally overreacting by bombarding many targets that I can see no justification for. Also this is counter-productive considering their intentions to root out the hisbollah militias. They will probably weaken the military capabilities of the militias in short therm but I'm sure Iran and Syria will be ready to replace their material losses and to "educate" the masses of new recruits seeking revenge.

[JdB 151]

Quote[/b] ]"Because they got bigger guns they may kill more people"? I somehow fail to see how that logic applies to a modern civilised democratic state.

A bomb dropped by an aircraft has a bigger blastradius then a chestrig, and also runs a risk of missing it's target, no matter how advanced it is, where as most suicide bombers activate their explosives when they are exactly in place. Bigger weapons do more damage, both intended and accidental.

[Supah 0]

Quote[/b] ]How very noble of you. I'd like to see you when the situation are real and this question is asked of you ten minutes after you have buried a family member who was killed by a terrorist bomb. Again, the IDF is not targeting civilians for the fun of it, these people are dying because Hezbollah forces are hiding amongst them as a way of blackmailing Israel to not bring them to justice.

It's not very noble, it's what I would expect from others if they had to choose between blowing up my country or choose other methods which would cause less damage.

Quote[/b] ]Perhaps you should email your methode of differentiating between an ambulance being used to ferry troops and supplies from a ambulance that isn't being used to do so to the NATO  headquarters. They will be highly interested in it.

You seem to refuse to understand that, even though IDF may not be able to see the difference between a ambulance used by Hizbollah or a ambulance used to help wounded people, it is wrong to target the ambulance as long as they don't know for sure that it is a Hizbollah ambulance. If you got a target and you don't know wether or not it is a terrorist or civilian target, it's wrong to blow it up. I would think this was quite obvious...

Quote[/b] ]Again, what choice does Israel have? Just let the terrorists get away with it because they hide amongst the civilian population afterwards? That would be an open invitation to come and kill Israeli's in Israel because once you envoke the magic "O look civilians!" Shield they wont attack you. Ofcourse using non violent means to appease this situation would have been better. Israel did that when they fully complied with UN Resolution 1559 by withdrawing from lebanon. Sadly the other side completely ignored their responsibillities under this resolution and even went on the attack. Apparently Hezbollah only wants to chose the path of violence.  Again, How would you want Israel to reply? Enlighten us.

They certainly should not blow up a building because a terrorist may be in there. Neither should they blow up a rocket launcher when it is in the middle of a schoolyard full of kids. I would want Israel to reply in a way were they kill the terrorists, not the civilians. According to reports from Sky News Israel doesn't really hit terrorists much because they blow up the spot after the terrorists have left...

Quote[/b] ]Again, where do you get this idea that it is the stated goal of this operation to kill as many civilians as possible? Hezbollah is using the population as a shield. If Israel doesn't attack because of this shield Hezbollah is given free reign to attack Israel and if they do Hezbollah uses the images of dead civilians as propaganda in the west. Damned if you do and damned if you don't. In this situation Israel has chosen for its own safety rather then what certain people in the west think.

I don't belive that their goal is to kill civilians, but I belive that they don't really care too much if they do kill civilians.

Quote[/b] ]If you think this comes just from Israel's action then you are being a bit short sighted. Radical Islam, Antisemitisme taught from a very early age (I can provide you with lot of nice pictures of arabs bringing the nazi salute etc., mein kampf being a best seller in the arab world), attempts of countries leaders to use Israel as a lightning rod for their own corruption and lack of democratic principles and freedom's and a failure to attain a measure of economic growth that spreads beyond the royal family. Israel's actions in the gaza strip can also be viewed as a response to terrorisme and/or massed military attacks by its neighbours in various previous wars. Chicken and the egg.

Of course support for Hizbollah comes from other sources, but at this point it's likely that most of the support for Hizbollah comes from Israels actions.

Quote[/b] ]A nice way to drop your mask. The moment you can't "win" a conversation you call the other person's point of view whining?

Indeed, it wasn't very serious to use the word whine, and I know I should have used other words

Quote[/b] ]If you fail or refuse to understand the situation Hezbollah's use of civilians as shields places Israel in then you have a very limited empathic ability. It is blackmail of the worst kind and you simply can not give into blackmail or you will forever be the victim of it. About your claims that it is ok for Hezbollah to kill civilians and use them as shields because their terrorists .... if the rules don't apply to everyone they apply to noone. If your enemy fights by the rules then you fight him by the rules ... if he doesn't ....

I don't refuse to understand that, though I am I quite sure Israel could have chosen another approach to this situation that would prove to fit their goal better.

And I've never claimed it's ok for Hizbollah to use civilians as targets, I've said that people don't expect anything else from a terrorist organization. Hizbollahs is wrong when they operate in a way that endanger civilian life, but you don't get suprised when they do. To put it like this, what would you be most suprised of and react most to; if Hizbollah sent suicide bombers to Israel or if Israel sent suicide bombers into Lebanon? The rules apply to everyone, be they a state or a terrorist organization, but you expect a higher level of moral from a democratic state than a terrorist organization.

And if Israel chooses to fight Hizbollah by the rules Hizbollah follows, then Israel loses the card of calling the other side terrorists, because they themself are also terrorists.

Quote[/b] ]Apparently you know a better way to respond, please share it with us.

I won't claim to be a military expert, but I am quite sure that Israel could and should have chosen a different approach to this situation. At this point it seems like their attacks have mostly killed civilians and destroyed the infrastructure in Lebanon, while Hizbollah isn't hurt to much. Their tactics have certainly failed them so far...

And about IDF not hitting the building, according to a sky news reporter on the scene there was no proof of Hizbollah activity in the area, and a they reported the building being hit twice, not the nearby area.

Quote[/b] ]Unfortunatly Hezbollah is part of the goverment (they have ministers in the goverment), so targeting the Lebanese infrastructure does mean hitting Hezbollah targets. Preventing the enemy from moving their troops is one of many methods to victory in a war/conflict. Lebanon is pretty mountainous, so blowing up bridges and roads is a smart move.

Targeting the infrastructure is a usual tactic, yes, but IMO Israel have targeted too much. Also, Israel keep saying that civilian losses isn't their fault because the civilians should have left the area, but their ways out is blown up by IDF...

Quote[/b] ]Hezbollah and Hamas target civilians, Israel only hits civilians by accident. Also, could you see the difference between a Hezbollah fighter and an innocent boy? The only difference is a scarf, and an AK47, which can both easily be removed for influencing the public opinion in your favor.

Honestly, I don't understand how you can "justify" Israel killing innocent people because the terrorists may look like civilians and the civilians may look like terrorists. It's quite obvious (for me at least) that in a situation like that you either think first and act later and risk taking a hit to make sure you don't shoot a little boy, or you act first and think later, and then you bloody hell have to stand up and take the blame when the target did indeed turn out to be a little boy.

Again saying "Israel should use better ways" is a bit lame. There are no better ways. If you know of one come up with concrete examples. If you can't perhaps that is because there arent any. You seem to expect Israel to just lay down and die. Israel has to attack and destroy the terrorists if they are to survive as a country. A situation where israel is continually subject to incursion,terrorisme and aerial bombardement by missiles is NOT an acceptable end situation. If the Arabs want to live in peace then they should show their will to do so by stopping terrorists operating from their territory and with their consent and funds. You can not expect Israel to negotiate when the other parties starting position is the death of all jews and the destruction of Israel. What should Olmert do? Accept a deal where all the Israeli's commit suicide and the country is dissolved and handed away? Because the destruction of Israel is what organisations as Hezbollah, Hamas and Iran's government (who is behind Hezbollah) have as their main stated objective. But none of this will happen because the Muslim politicians have whipped their people into too much of a frenzy with years of antisemetic propaganda aimed to distract from their own failures. Their propaganda has taken on a dynamic of their own and now that they are being forced to cooperate with the US and Israel if they want to remain in power their behaviour is seen as weakness by their people who still believe in the old propaganda.