Israel vs Hezbollah Thread #3

[Yarrah]

Meanwhile, the killing continues:

* Israel has blown up some bridges in the northern part of Lebanon. Tyrus has also been under fire from the IDF.
* A Lebanese military armoured personel carrier has been fired at in the western Beekaavalley
* Isreali troops have reached the Litani river but have lost 24 soldiers. 5 more are still missing.

I honestly don't think this conflict will end as long as there are orthodox Jews in the Israeli government and muslim terrorists in the countries surrounding Israel. The terrorists want the destruction if Israel and the orthodox Jews want the destruction of Palestina. I fear that the country will only end if one of them succeeds (but let's hope such a thing will never happen, even though I'd love to see an end to this conflict).

[Aquawind]

Israel has blown up some bridges in the northern part of Lebanon.

I don't get that.. The issue is in the south why ruin the Lebonese infrastructure when the hez freaks(correct no respect for them) are concentrated in the south? Were freak fighters hiding under the bridges? You would think the Lebonese would be smarter and be able to protect their infrastructure by keeping the freaks out of there. Even if the Lebonese allowed this to happen it seems like they are baiting Israel into some of there fruitless attacks just to make it look rediculious. Yet Isreal continues to take the bait. Seems foolish to me..

[kevin]

Israel is actually collectively punishing the Lebanese government for their support of Hizbollah. Its about making the Lebanese responsible for any nonstate violence which comes out of their territory. Bombing infrastructure often puts pressure on a government. Consider for example the NATO bombings of Serbia in order to effect change in Kosovo.

[Audrey2Katrina]

Consider for example the NATO bombings of Serbia in order to effect change in Kosovo.

EXACTLY! And the thing I find most odd, is that while the most ardent human-rights groups protested, the universal "global outrage" at literally THOUSANDS of "innocent civilian" deaths that occured in Serbia--was all but non-existent there. For nearly three MONTHS NATO bombers and destruction rained on Serbian infrastructure with impunity, and almost muted global outrage--no massive street protests, no UN DEMANDS of "restraint", and on, and on...and yet that (Serbia) was a nation about the size of Maine being blasted by the combined forces of NATO which included by-far the world's most advanced and well armed technological nations. When people talk disproportionate--perhaps they should look at that comparison.

I am as opposed to innocent deaths as anyone; but I also realize its inevitibility in a war scenario. We do NOT know all of the ramifications here--perhaps it's to punish the Lebanese government which has been quite complicit in doing NOTHING to live up to its end of disarming Hezbollah, perhaps it's because these cowards (the Hez) have, in their own desperation, found new ways to be "re-supplied" through these northern routes, as all southern ones have been pretty much made null and void. I don't know--but I just read an interesting article by Charles Krauthammer (I think a syndicated Chicago Trib writer) that tries to put a lot of this "disproportionate" nonsense into a proper perspective.

A2K

[stormtruth]

Sy Hersh says the Israel-Lebanon war was a pre-planned initial phase before the US targets Iran's nuclear facilities. Hersh usually has pretty good sources.

Here is the article

Not sure if it is accurate but it would make sense to try and diminish Hez's weapons before striking Iran.

[Audrey2Katrina]

Okay... I knew it was a major oulet--it was the Washington Post... and if you want to read the entire article--and I thought it well worth the read-- here's the link:

Disproportionate?

for those who want only snippets, here are but a few:

"What other country, when attacked in an unprovoked aggression across a recognized international frontier, is then put on a countdown clock by the world, given a limited time window in which to fight back, regardless of whether it has restored its own security?"

...

"To hear the world pass judgment on the Israel-Hezbollah war as it unfolds is to live in an Orwellian moral universe. With a few significant exceptions (the leadership of the United States, Britain, Australia, Canada and a very few others), the world -- governments, the media, U.N. bureaucrats -- has completely lost its moral bearings.

"The word that obviates all thinking and magically inverts victim into aggressor is "disproportionate," as in the universally decried "disproportionate Israeli response."

...

"The perversity of today's international outcry lies in the fact that there is indeed a disproportion in this war, a radical moral asymmetry between Hezbollah and Israel: Hezbollah is deliberately trying to create civilian casualties on both sides while Israel is deliberately trying to minimize civilian casualties, also on both sides.

In perhaps the most blatant terror campaign from the air since the London Blitz, Hezbollah is raining rockets on Israeli cities and villages. These rockets are packed with ball bearings that can penetrate automobiles and shred human flesh. They are meant to kill and maim. And they do."

...

"But it is a dual campaign. Israeli innocents must die in order for Israel to be terrorized. But Lebanese innocents must also die in order for Israel to be demonized, which is why Hezbollah hides its fighters, its rockets, its launchers, its entire infrastructure among civilians. Creating human shields is a war crime. It is also a Hezbollah specialty.

On Wednesday CNN cameras showed destruction in Tyre. What does Israel have against Tyre and its inhabitants? Nothing. But the long-range Hezbollah rockets that have been raining terror on Haifa are based in Tyre. What is Israel to do? Leave untouched the launch sites that are deliberately placed in built-up areas?"

There is more to the article; but I find those indicative of many of the points I'd been trying less successfully, perhaps, to make. And that is the real "disproportionate" object in this entire scenario: it is the level of outrage when compared to some other pretty "outrageous" acts that have been perpetrated by far more aggressive, evil, and dangerous sources of--"outrage".

A2K

[The Sandcrab]

A discussion of the doctrine of proprtionality:
http://www.cfr.org/publication/11115/is ... ality.html

To co-opt Bill Maher's argument about terrorists, you can accurately call 'em lots of bad things, but for taking on and holding off the IDF for 1 month, "cowards" ain't one of 'em.

There were protests of NATO's action in Kosovo, mostly from the far left, but tactics were disapproved of by people from left to right.

[Audrey2Katrina]

I would hardly call the CFR's presentation an entirely fair representation of facts. Take for example the opening line:

Israel's offensive into Lebanon and the Gaza Strip, in response to the abductions of two of its soldiers by Hezbollah and one by Hamas militants, raises a number of difficult legal questions. Among them: Did the Israeli response violate the principle of proportionality?

In the first place saying it was in response to "two abductions" here, and "one by Hamas" there is oversimplistic in the extreme. It neither states the numbers of Israeli soldiers actually KILLED in these attacks, nor does it mention that neither Hamas, nor Hezbollah have never ceased in their periodic jaunts INTO Israeli lands with the expressed purpose of causing terror, or the fact that both have continued to supply their minions with armaments to continue raining terror on/in Israel without any real lasting cessation of hostilities whasoever--ever! I give it credit only inasmuch as it does at the very least give Israel "the right to defend itself" and expresses some degree of "doubt"; but that said, it isn't too hard to figure out where the obvious sentiments of the writer appear to lay. All this "proportionality" drivel is, is just another attempt to sidestep the real cause of all this tragedy--the acts of a cowardly terrorist organization bent on the ultimate genocide of an entire nation of people. And yes... the word is "cowards".

cowards" ain't one of 'em.

Actually it is. Maher's comment was about people who ultimately commit suicide in their act of terror--not a good analogy with people who sequester themselves within civilian populations with the obvious intent to use them as shields (in and of itself a cowardly act) and to up the body count among the "innocent". Yes, "coward" is most definitely one of 'em.

There were protests of NATO's action in Kosovo, mostly from the far left, but tactics were disapproved of by people from left to right.

I pretty much acknowledged the existence of "protest"--but being disapproved "left and right" in no way compares with the levels of outrage over Israel's situation. And as has already been noted, the NATO bombings involved far more powerful forces against an even far less capable opponent.

A2K

[kevin]

Hizbollah is a cowardly institution. While I understand that they were able to 'kick out' the Israelis from southern Lebanon, they are in no way brave warriors. I believe people who go around advancing their power from the shadows at the expense of their countrymen are not resistance fighters but ambitious cretins. Lebanon was close to having political institutions which would be able to assert authority over her territory, and then Hizbollah rather than allowing a stronger Lebanon to develop committed an act of war against the greatest power in the region.

Not only are they cowards, but in terms of acting in Lebanese interests, they are down right stupid.

[Audrey2Katrina]

Hizbollah is a cowardly institution. While I understand that they were able to 'kick out' the Israelis from southern Lebanon, they are in no way brave warriors. I believe people who go around advancing their power from the shadows at the expense of their countrymen are not resistance fighters but ambitious cretins. Lebanon was close to having political institutions which would be able to assert authority over her territory, and then Hizbollah rather than allowing a stronger Lebanon to develop committed an act of war against the greatest power in the region.

Not only are they cowards, but in terms of acting in Lebanese interests, they are down right stupid.

[Yarrah]

Latest news:

* The Israeli goverment agrees with the UN-resolution. There has been a lot of fighting in the southern part of Lebanon today though, since Isreal wants to take out as many Hezbollah fighters as they want before they have to stop.
* Israeli minister of foreign affairs Tzipi Livni has said that he is willing to negotiate with Hezbollah about the realease of the two soldiers that wrere kidnapped a month ago
* Four buildings have been destroyed by Israeli bombs in a southern suburb of Beirut, killing one person. The IDF thought Nasrallah was hiding there.

The most important points of the UN-resolution are:

* Israel must leave Lebanon
* A UN peace-keeping force of about 15.000 soldiers will be stationed in Southern Lebanon
* A cease-fire will start tomorrow morning

I find it difficult to side with one party in this war. I absolutely don't agree with the way Israel is handling this conflict, I despise the way Hezbollah uses innocent people to further their islamo-fascist course and I also don't agree with the Lebanese goverment, which seems to be ruled by a few of Hezbollah's men. Is anyone else also having trouble to side with one of the parties or is it just me?

[JTD]

The question is: Will the ceasfire hold?

[Derek Ortt]

I'll give it about an hour at most, ebfore the old Katushas start flying again

[Yarrah]

...or if Israel starts bombing again.

[Brent]

The question is: Will the ceasfire hold?

I'm beginning to wonder if there will be a ceasefire, much less it holding... sure doesn't look like it. It's been one of the worst days.

[Brent]

The ceasefire has begun...

We'll see if it holds. I have serious doubts.

[Audrey2Katrina]

Well Hell's bowlers have already let it be known they will NOT be disarmed by the "Lebanese" army... or any other. Now let me see...this is IN Lebanon, and they refuse to let the Lebanese military move them out or disarm them...???

Yeah, I guess so-- from civilian shields to cowardly tactics, to not following UN directives a whit... that sounds like them.

If nothing else they ARE consistent.

A2K

[artist]

speech by Nasrallah translated - talk about talking out of both sides of his mouth! Seems he is alittle upset with the Arabs, though...
As the sppech goes along the will be split seconds of black but it is not over. Very interesting -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QYb6812 ... ed&search=

if his speech tdoesn't come up then click on
General Hassan Nasrallah-I Told Lebanese Political.... on the right hand side.

[Brent]

10 rockets have landed in Southern Lebanon, none in Israel, according to the IDF.

[Stephanie]

Well Hell's bowlers have already let it be known they will NOT be disarmed by the "Lebanese" army... or any other. Now let me see...this is IN Lebanon, and they refuse to let the Lebanese military move them out or disarm them...???

Yeah, I guess so-- from civilian shields to cowardly tactics, to not following UN directives a whit... that sounds like them.

If nothing else they ARE consistent.

A2K

That's the main problem in a nutshell. Lebanon must take control of their own country if they ever want any peace.