PDA

View Full Version : Isreal Blindly Firing Missiles into Populated Areas


Volcana
Aug 1st, 2006, 09:40 PM
Hezbollah Using Civilians As Human Shields

Believe it or not, the thread title and the sentence above are describing the same thing.

Hezbollah are using the 'fire, move and fire' tactics of classical guerilla warfare. Israel are firing back at where the missiles come from. Using munitions that destroy a good deal of the surrounding area. This is classical, long range artillery war. But, once the airports and roads have been bombed so civilians can't leave, this sort of artillery and bomber warfare guarantees civilian casualties. It simply isn't accurate enough not too.

But in the USA, saying 'Hezbollah is using civilians as human shields' is politically a lot more acceptable than 'Israel isn't exactly sure where the Hezbollah fighters are, so they're killing everyone anywhere near where they see a missile fired'.

Yet it comes to the same thing.

For that matter, there not that much difference between Israel shelling South Lebanon, and Hezbollah shelling northern Israel. The Israelis are using more accurate weapons, but they are also vastly more destructive weapons. This is why so many more Lebanese civilians are dying than Israeli civilians.

One might also note, the IDF is firing at a lot more than positions where missiles are being fired. There have been published reports of the IDF being ordered to destroy '10 buildings for every missile', and civilians saying that houses are being destroyed in towns with no Hezbollah fighters. Given that both Israel and Hezbollah have reason to lie about this subject, there's no real way to know who to believe.

It would be nice if the political spin on the war news wasn't quite so intense, but that won't ever change.

There's that wonderful George Carlin line 'Why are Israeli terrorists 'commandos', and Arab commandos, 'terrorists'?

Let me leave you with one last thought. 'Terrorism' was a term that originally described actions by the state against civilian populations and resistance groups. The tem came out of 'The Reign of Terror', a political period in France that immediately followed the death of Louis XVI of France in 1793.

lakeway11
Aug 1st, 2006, 10:15 PM
http://www.rense.com/1.imagesH/lebmap.jpg

JustineTime
Aug 1st, 2006, 10:28 PM
I love how the thread starter (consistent with his/her world view in general, though, I'm afraid :tape: ) continually chooses to ignore the fact that

:shout: THIS WOULDN'T BE HAPPENING AT ALL IF HEZBOLLAH HADN'T STARTED A SHOOTING WAR WITH ISRAEL IN THE FIRST PLACE!!! :shout:

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

:confused: Did I forget to mention the fact that he/she doesn't seem to mind when Israeli children are DELIBERATELY targeted by Hezbollah, in 180 degree contrast to the ACCIDENTAL (albeit JUST as tragic) collateral deaths to Lebanese children brought about by HEZBOLLAH DELIBERATELY DRAWING ISRAEL'S FIRE TO THOSE AREAS, thereby using their own people as chips to win political points on the Arab street???? :scratch:

NAH!!!! It's ALL Israel's fault. :shrug: :mad: :fiery: :help:

Just as Islamo-fascist terrorism in general is America's fault, eh? :hehehe:

:rolleyes:

azdaja
Aug 1st, 2006, 10:35 PM
no, arabs are evil. go kill their children and then blame it on them :rolleyes:

JustineTime
Aug 1st, 2006, 10:40 PM
no, arabs are evil. go kill their children and then blame it on them :rolleyes:


Ye-a-ah-h. THAT was the gist of my post. :rolleyes:

fufuqifuqishahah
Aug 1st, 2006, 11:01 PM
:confused: Did I forget to mention the fact that he/she doesn't seem to mind when Israeli children are DELIBERATELY targeted by Hezbollah, in 180 degree contrast to the ACCIDENTAL (albeit JUST as tragic) collateral deaths to Lebanese children brought about by HEZBOLLAH DELIBERATELY DRAWING ISRAEL'S FIRE TO THOSE AREAS, thereby using their own people as chips to win political points on the Arab street???? :scratch:

:rolleyes:

who said HEZBOLLAH deliberately drew israel fire to those areas??? what, the biased NEWS?

Volcana
Aug 2nd, 2006, 01:34 AM
I love how the thread starter (consistent with his/her world view in general, though, I'm afraid :tape: ) continually chooses to ignore the fact that

:shout: THIS WOULDN'T BE HAPPENING AT ALL IF HEZBOLLAH HADN'T STARTED A SHOOTING WAR WITH ISRAEL IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!You waste an awful lot of words there. Pity you didn't bother to study the facts first. Israel and Hezbollah have been shooting at each since for well over a decade. The shooting didn't stop when Israel partially withdrew from Lebanon in 2000. The shooting was just longer range (Except the occassional raid by either side). It's been going on ever since. This is just the latest move in a very long chess game.

Nothing started July 12th. It's a continuation of a war that has fluctuations in intensity, but has never truly stopped.

Did I forget to mention the fact that he/she doesn't seem to mind when Israeli children are DELIBERATELY targeted by HezbollahI post a lot. I stand by what I write. If that's your conclusion, you're just wrong. But I can live with you being wrong. It's something you do well.

the ACCIDENTAL (albeit JUST as tragic) collateral deaths to Lebanese children brought about by HEZBOLLAH DELIBERATELY DRAWING ISRAEL'S FIRE TO THOSE AREAS, thereby using their own people as chips to win political points on the Arab street???? Sorry, no evidence supports the theory that Hzbollah is trying to get Israel to fire at Lebanese civilians. Also, we have only Israel's word that they aren't attcking civilians. I'm inclined to believe them, in a limited sense. But when ambulances, hospitals, Lebanese Army bases, and rescuers trying to get to UN observers are attacked by the IDF, the idea that they're just targetting Hexbollah fighters is unsupportable. It's a nice myth some of Israel's more ardent supporters like to throw around, but then, that's the actual point of the thread.

One sde "Killing civilians indiscriminantly" = The other side "Using human shields".

It describes the same action. Only the politics of the person talking vary.

If you use tactics that kill a lot of non-combatants, you need a story that blames somebody else.

I think the IDF would be way better off saying "yeah our tactics kill a lot of civilians, but the alternative is ground warfare where WE would take a lot more casualties".

lakeway11
Aug 2nd, 2006, 02:29 AM
Shameless. Utterly shameless

Volcano, can you believe this!

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/VIDEO__Ad_For_Zions_Sake_0731.html

lakeway11
Aug 2nd, 2006, 02:34 AM
...a view from a real conservative--not the phony transformed leftist neocon Trotskyites

The Moral Culpability for Qana

by Patrick J. Buchanan

"Everyone in southern Lebanon is a terrorist and is connected to Hezbollah," roared Israeli Justice Minister Haim Ramon on July 27.

"Every village from which a Katyusha is fired must be destroyed," bellowed an Israeli general in a quote bannered by the nation's largest newspaper, Yedioth Ahronoth.

The Israeli paper then summarized what the justice minister and general were saying: "In other words, a village from which rockets are fired at Israel will simply be destroyed by fire." That was Thursday.

Sunday, in Qana, 57 of Haim Ramon's "terrorists," 37 of them children, were massacred with precision-guided bombs. Apparently, Katyushas had been fired from Qana, near the destroyed building.

"One who goes to sleep with rockets shouldn't be surprised if he doesn't wake up in the morning," said Israel's ambassador to the United Nations, Dan Gillerman.

Today, we hear unctuous statements about how Israel takes pains to avoid civilian casualties, drops leaflets to warn civilians to flee target areas, and conforms to all the rules of civilized warfare.

But Israel's words and deeds contradict her propaganda. As the war began, Ehud Olmert accused Lebanon, which had condemned Hezbollah for the killing and capture of the Israeli soldiers, of an "act of war." Army Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz publicly threatened "to turn back the clock in Lebanon by 20 years."

Gillerman, at a pro-Israel rally in New York, thundered, "[T]o those countries who claim that we are using disproportionate force, I have only this to say: You're damn right we are."

"His comments drew wild applause," said the Jerusalem Post.

Though Israel is dissembling now, Gillerman spoke the truth then. No sooner had Hezbollah taken the two Israeli soldiers hostage than Israel unleashed an air war on Lebanon. The Beirut airport was bombed, its fuel storage tanks set ablaze. The coast was blockaded. Power plants, gas stations, lighthouses, bridges, roads, trucks, and buses were all hit with air strikes.

Within 48 hours, it was apparent Israel was exploiting Hezbollah's attack to execute a preconceived military plan to destroy Lebanon i.e., the collective punishment of a people and nation for the crimes of a renegade militia they could not control. It was the moral equivalent of a municipal police going berserk, shooting, killing, and ravaging an African-American community, because Black Panthers had ambushed and killed cops.

If Israel is not in violation of the principle of proportionality, by which Christians are to judge the conduct of a just war, what can that term mean? There are 600 civilian dead in Lebanon, 19 in Israel, a ratio of 30-1, though Hezbollah is firing unguided rockets, while Israel is using precision-guided munitions.

Thousands of Lebanese civilians are injured. Perhaps 800,000 are homeless.

Yet, whatever one thinks of the morality of what Israel is doing, the stupidity is paralyzing. Instead of maintaining the moral and political high ground it had when even Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan were condemning Hezbollah, and privately hoping Israel would inflict a humiliating defeat on Nasrallah Israel launched an air war on an innocent people. Now, 87 percent of Lebanese back Hezbollah, and the entire Arab and Islamic world, Shia and Sunni alike, is rallying behind Nasrallah.

And how does one defend the behavior of the United States?

When Gillerman was exulting in the disproportionality of Israel's attack on Lebanon, U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton was smiling smugly beside him. When the UN Security Council tabled a resolution condemning Hezbollah's igniting of the war and Katyusha attacks, but also the excesses of Israel's reprisals, U.S. Ambassador John Bolton vetoed it. When a few congressmen sought to moderate a pro-Israeli resolution by adding words urging "all sides to protect innocent life and infrastructure," GOP leader John Boehner ordered the words taken down.

Why? Because, says Zbigniew Brzezinski, AIPAC, the Israeli lobby, had prepared the resolution and wanted it passed the way they wrote it. Our Knesset complied. It sailed through the House 410-8.

For two weeks, Bush seemed unable to find a word of criticism for what our friends in Israel were doing to our friends in Lebanon. He publicly sent more bombs to Israel. He and Condi emphasized that America did not want a cease-fire yet.

And because America provides Israel with the bombs it uses on Lebanon, and we refused to restrain the Israelis, and we opposed every effort for a cease-fire before Sunday, America shares full moral and political responsibility for the massacre at Qana.

Rubbing our noses in our own cravenness, "Bibi" Netanyahu took time out, a week ago, from his daily appearances on American television, denouncing terrorism, to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the terror attack on the King David Hotel by Menachem Begin's Irgun, an attack that killed 92 people, among them British nurses.

This was not a terrorist act, Bibi explained, because Irgun telephoned a 15-minute warning to the hotel before the bombs went off. Right. And those children in that basement in Qana should not have ignored the Israeli leaflets warning them to clear out of southern Lebanon.

Our Israeli friends appear to be playing us for fools.

COPYRIGHT CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.

SelesFan70
Aug 2nd, 2006, 02:40 AM
I love how the thread starter (consistent with his/her world view in general, though, I'm afraid :tape: ) continually chooses to ignore the fact that

:shout: THIS WOULDN'T BE HAPPENING AT ALL IF HEZBOLLAH HADN'T STARTED A SHOOTING WAR WITH ISRAEL IN THE FIRST PLACE!!! :shout:

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

:confused: Did I forget to mention the fact that he/she doesn't seem to mind when Israeli children are DELIBERATELY targeted by Hezbollah, in 180 degree contrast to the ACCIDENTAL (albeit JUST as tragic) collateral deaths to Lebanese children brought about by HEZBOLLAH DELIBERATELY DRAWING ISRAEL'S FIRE TO THOSE AREAS, thereby using their own people as chips to win political points on the Arab street???? :scratch:

NAH!!!! It's ALL Israel's fault. :shrug: :mad: :fiery: :help:

Just as Islmo-fascist terrorism in general is America's fault, eh? :hehehe:

:rolleyes:

When muslims fire missiles at Israel, they are "fighting back"...when Israel uses more force they aren't playing fair. :rolleyes: The people on this board NEVER disappoint do they? :tape:

Volcana
Aug 2nd, 2006, 03:11 AM
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/VIDEO__Ad_For_Zions_Sake_0731.htmlI forwarded the link to a couple friends who are ardent supporters of Israel, but a bit cynical about charitable contributions. They'll contribute if they find the site is legit.

I'll send my money to Medecins Sans Frontieres. But thanks for the tip. :)

Volcana
Aug 2nd, 2006, 03:22 AM
...a view from a real conservative--not the phony transformed leftist neocon Trotskyites

The Moral Culpability for Qana

by Patrick J. BuchananPat Buchanan is, in some ways, the bane of my political existence. 90% of what he says is sensible, insightful, well-reasoned, and shows a complete awareness of the current situation.

The 10% somehow always turns out to be psycho-pathetic.

But this time, he's taken nuance to a new level. There's exactly ONE sentence that points out that Hezbollah fired missiles into Israel. The other 99% is about Israeli 'disproportionality', and disregard for the live of civilians.

I've got to reject the entire article. It's werll-writteb, logical, and utterly misleading.

JustineTime
Aug 2nd, 2006, 06:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JustineTime
I love how the thread starter (consistent with his/her world view in general, though, I'm afraid :tape: ) continually chooses to ignore the fact that

:shout: THIS WOULDN'T BE HAPPENING AT ALL IF HEZBOLLAH HADN'T STARTED A SHOOTING WAR WITH ISRAEL IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!

</B>You waste an awful lot of words there. Pity you didn't bother to study the facts first. Israel and Hezbollah have been shooting at each since for well over a decade.

Gee, thanks for clueing me in, Volcana. And all this time I thought Jews and Arabs were getting along famously. :rolleyes:


The shooting didn't stop when Israel partially withdrew from Lebanon in 2000.

The Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916 marked the first attempt to draw the Lebanon-Israel border on a map. In 1918, as World War I victors, the British and French tried to draw that line on the ground. As a military, and not a political boundary, the border remained technically open to revision. Several modifications, reflecting primarily the rivalry and interests of the British and French in the division of spoils, were adopted and codified in 1923. It is this 1923 border (referred to today as the "blue line") which UN team cartographers painstakingly verified in the wake of Israel's [:scratch: Nope, no "partial" here. :shrug: ]withdrawal from Lebanon.

"Partially" withdrew. :rolleyes: Even your precious UN verified the withdrawal. :tape:

The shooting was just longer range (Except the occassional raid by either side).

I really love your moral equivalence here. :bigclap: But I really must admit my ignorance: name 1 time Israel has made an unprovoked, unilateral raid into Lebanon, would you please? :confused:


Quote:
Originally Posted by JustineTime
Did I forget to mention the fact that he/she doesn't seem to mind when Israeli children are DELIBERATELY targeted by Hezbollah

I post a lot. I stand by what I write. If that's your conclusion, you're just wrong.

Really? Perhaps so. So pray direct me to a post of yours where you decry Hizbullah's deliberate targeting of Israeli women and children as vehemently (OK, at all), as you do Israel's "mass murder" of Lebanese civilians.

But I can live with you being wrong. It's something you do well.

We all have our special gifts, don't we?


Quote:
Originally Posted by JustineTime
the ACCIDENTAL (albeit JUST as tragic) collateral deaths to Lebanese children brought about by HEZBOLLAH DELIBERATELY DRAWING ISRAEL'S FIRE TO THOSE AREAS, thereby using their own people as chips to win political points on the Arab street????

Sorry, no evidence supports the theory that Hzbollah is trying to get Israel to fire at Lebanese civilians. Also, we have only Israel's word that they aren't attcking civilians. I'm inclined to believe them, in a limited sense. But when ambulances, hospitals, Lebanese Army bases, and rescuers trying to get to UN observers are attacked by the IDF, the idea that they're just targetting Hexbollah fighters is unsupportable. It's a nice myth some of Israel's more ardent supporters like to throw around, but then, that's the actual point of the thread.

I just LOVE your fair-and-balanced Israel-can-do-no-right manner of posting. :drool:

:rolleyes:

If you use tactics that kill a lot of non-combatants, you need a story that blames somebody else.

I think the IDF would be way better off saying "yeah our tactics kill a lot of civilians, but the alternative is ground warfare where WE would take a lot more casualties".
Oy vey! :help: Your kind will only be satisfied when Israel lines up a bunch of its own soldiers and machine guns 'em into a ditch, until the casualty counts are more fair and balanced.

:secret: And they ARE going in on the ground, but thank God they didn't take your advice and softened up the opposition with their superior firepower first. :bigclap:

How confusing it must be living in your world of gray. :sad: For myself, I hope Israel grinds Hizbullah to powder. You really need to get a clue as to how these Islamo-fascist nutcases REALLY think...if, that is, you don't want to face the choice between conversion to fundamentalist Islam or death in the near future. ;) :shrug:

Aphrodite
Aug 2nd, 2006, 08:40 AM
Gee, thanks for clueing me in, Volcana. And all this time I thought Jews and Arabs were getting along famously. :rolleyes:




[/font]

"Partially" withdrew. :rolleyes: Even your precious UN verified the withdrawal. :tape:



I really love your moral equivalence here. :bigclap: But I really must admit my ignorance: name 1 time Israel has made an unprovoked, unilateral raid into Lebanon, would you please? :confused:



Really? Perhaps so. So pray direct me to a post of yours where you decry Hizbullah's deliberate targeting of Israeli women and children [s]as vehemently (OK, at all), as you do Israel's "mass murder" of Lebanese civilians.



We all have our special gifts, don't we?



I just LOVE your fair-and-balanced Israel-can-do-no-right manner of posting. :drool:

:rolleyes:


Oy vey! :help: Your kind will only be satisfied when Israel lines up a bunch of its own soldiers and machine guns 'em into a ditch, until the casualty counts are more fair and balanced.

:secret: And they ARE going in on the ground, but thank God they didn't take your advice and softened up the opposition with their superior firepower first. :bigclap:

How confusing it must be living in your world of gray. :sad: For myself, I hope Israel grinds Hizbullah to powder. You really need to get a clue as to how these Islamo-fascist nutcases REALLY think...if, that is, you don't want to face the choice between conversion to fundamentalist Islam or death in the near future. ;) :shrug:


grinding people to powder wow, you just won the fucked up of the year award, wow that comment is just :fiery: , who are you to take life so lightly, what makes you better than a terrorist, i mean your comments are just:fiery: , seems you treat life with no respect, turning people to dust is much harder to do, talking about it is one thing, doing it is another, if you really feel like this go get some help, i mean we all have our opinions and that is great but you well thats a bit too much really go get some help:rolleyes:

"Sluggy"
Aug 2nd, 2006, 08:44 AM
what kind of person spends most of his time criticizing a country but cant spell the country correctly?

Wigglytuff
Aug 2nd, 2006, 08:57 AM
Ye-a-ah-h. THAT was the gist of my post. :rolleyes:
actually it was.

the point of the first post, is that there is far too much spin (FROM BOTH SIDES) on this issue for it to be clearly understood from afar. 100% true IMO

and how do you respond? by using your hate to spin. :banghead: :banghead:

Kunal
Aug 2nd, 2006, 09:14 AM
should have stopped last week

the UN tries to bring in a cease fire and the date gets postponed all the time.....deaths incraese

Halardfan
Aug 2nd, 2006, 11:25 AM
The issue of proportionate response is crucial here...indeed its a principal enshrined in interntionl law.

That Israel had a right to repond is clear, but its also clear that its response has been wildly out of propotion and ultimately counter productive...before they had a divided Lebanon, now to most Lebanese, Hezzbollah is the hero of the hour.

To those who say that once provoked Israel has the right to do what it wishes...lets look at the IRA, they committed all manner of atrocities, kidnappings and murders down the years...but lets take a single incident, the Brighton bomb in the mid 80's where they tired to wipe out the British government in a single blow.

I think that counts as provocation right? My question is this, should Britain in response simply have flattened the catholic communities in Northern Ireland and bombed the hell out of the Irish republic too? Would that have been OK with America?

Yes or no?

The answer is no of course. As it was, the British governments action in Northern Ireland in that era were often shameful, but never in recent history remotely touched Israel's actions today.

Worth noting again that the IRA got it weapons and money via its Irish-American benefactors.

Ultimately Blair negotiated a deal with the IRA, despte them trying to assasinate is both John Major and Maggie Thatcher...and Northern Ireland as a result as now seen years of relative peace and stability, if not yet a final solution.

If you can negotiate with the IRA you can sit down with Syria, Iran and Hezzbollah and hammer out a lasting deal.

While your at it, Israel must soon do the same wtih the Palestine too.

Nir
Aug 2nd, 2006, 12:11 PM
grinding people to powder wow, you just won the fucked up of the year award, wow that comment is just :fiery: , who are you to take life so lightly, what makes you better than a terrorist, i mean your comments are just:fiery: , seems you treat life with no respect, turning people to dust is much harder to do, talking about it is one thing, doing it is another, if you really feel like this go get some help, i mean we all have our opinions and that is great but you well thats a bit too much really go get some help:rolleyes:

What is the matter with you people?

Justinetime said: "I hope Israel grinds Hizbullah to powder."

Which means he meant terrorists, not civillians.

Stop being so sensitive all the time, this is a war not a life style show. people will die, I don't like civillians dying but I know that it will happen and i'm not talking only on their side, because they are not the only one who lost civillians.

Killing terrorist is a must, if I was a soldier and I would have cought a hezbollah fighter in my sight I would kill him, for sure and no, it doesn't mean i'm a bad person. If someone wants to kill me (terrorists), I have no problem to see him die. (again, terrorists, not civillians)

TheBoiledEgg
Aug 2nd, 2006, 12:29 PM
Shameless. Utterly shameless

Volcano, can you believe this!

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/VIDEO__Ad_For_Zions_Sake_0731.html

what utter nonsense :lol: :lol:
shameless indeed.

Lord Nelson
Aug 2nd, 2006, 01:11 PM
Shameless. Utterly shameless

Volcano, can you believe this!

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/VIDEO__Ad_For_Zions_Sake_0731.html
so then what is your opinion on al jazeera ads that support the Lebanese people? It is almost exactly like the American-Israeli ad.

"Sluggy"
Aug 2nd, 2006, 01:25 PM
I'm not sure what to understand with that link. There are and always have been Israeli civilians who have lost loves from suicide bombers and missle attacks. The foundation is soliciting support for these people. What is so funny about that?

sapir1434
Aug 2nd, 2006, 01:28 PM
Give me a name of one country that wouldn't do the same that Israel does or even worse!!! Israel has to show its power, has to let the whole world know that they won't let anyone doubt their existence.
The world is afraid to fight against the terrorism, but Israel is doing it against the Hezbollah.

"Sluggy"
Aug 2nd, 2006, 01:42 PM
Give me a name of one country that wouldn't do the same that Israel does or even worse!!! Israel has to show its power, has to let the whole world know that they won't let anyone doubt their existence.
The world is afraid to fight against the terrorism, but Israel is doing it against the Hezbollah.

Yeah!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :) :worship: :D ;) :angel: :bounce: :bounce:

azdaja
Aug 2nd, 2006, 09:00 PM
Give me a name of one country that wouldn't do the same that Israel does or even worse!!! Israel has to show its power, has to let the whole world know that they won't let anyone doubt their existence.
The world is afraid to fight against the terrorism, but Israel is doing it against the Hezbollah.
yeah, we are all scared shitless :rolleyes: you should say "the world does not want to steep to the level of the terrorists, but some are more than happy to do that".

JustineTime
Aug 2nd, 2006, 09:23 PM
yeah, we are all scared shitless :rolleyes: you should say "the world does not want to steep to the level of the terrorists, but some are more than happy to do that".

sapir, I would argue that it's not that the world is necessarily afraid per se (with the possible exception of the French :p ), but rather that they share the opinion of people like azdaja here. :help:

What you don't understand, azdaja, is that unless America(with Israel's help :bigclap: ) as usual does the fighting for you and wins decisively and overwhelmingly, you will eventually do one of two things: fight...or surrender and be converted or made tributary to a world caliphate. You can spew all that John Lennon/commie/give-peace-a-chance rhetoric until the Lord's return, but ultimately, assuming you don't die in the interim, you WILL be forced to acknowledge the truth of what I say. It's inescapable. :shrug:

azdaja
Aug 2nd, 2006, 09:34 PM
sapir, I would argue that it's not that the world is necessarily afraid per se (with the possible exception of the French :p ), but rather that they share the opinion of people like azdaja here. :help:

What you don't understand, azdaja, is that unless America(with Israel's help :bigclap: ) as usual does the fighting for you and wins decisively and overwhelmingly, you will eventually do one of two things: fight...or surrender and be converted or made tributary to a world caliphate. You can spew all that John Lennon/commie/give-peace-a-chance rhetoric until the Lord's return, but ultimately, assuming you don't die in the interim, you WILL be forced to acknowledge the truth of what I say. It's inescapable. :shrug:
what john lennon rhetoric? :confused: i am not a pacifist and i hate hippies :tape: wars can sometimes be justified and under certain circumstances even i could fight. i simply think the justifications for this war that i hear are utterly pathetic and delusional. you can't justify even a minor military operation with that, let alone a war with so much destruction and so many innocents killed.

we are "afraid" they tell to us, yet they start killing because "otherwise they will be destroyed". there must be a lot of fear among them and you also seem to be scared to the point of being paranoid. if you are scared like that then you will be prepared to accept that children get killed and that people are suffering. in reality though you simply need a shrink.

JustineTime
Aug 2nd, 2006, 09:45 PM
what john lennon rhetoric? :confused: i am not a pacifist and i hate hippies :tape: wars can sometimes be justified and under certain circumstances even i could fight. i simply think the justifications for this war that i hear are utterly pathetic and delusional. you can't justify even a minor military operation with that, let alone a war with so much destruction and so many innocents killed.

we are "afraid" they tell to us, yet they start killing because "otherwise they will be destroyed". there must be a lot of fear among them and you also seem to be scared to the point of being paranoid. if you are scared like that then you will be prepared to accept that children get killed and that people are suffering. in reality though you simply need a shrink.

OK, so I retract the commie comment, although I've gotten distinctly marxist vibes from you in the past. My bad.

Me scared? No. My future is secure one way or t'other. But I have a healthy respect for these Islamo-fascist monkeys; they're doggedly determined, psychotically focused on their objective, and they don't just welcome, but HOPE for death. They must either all be killed or their ideology :hehehe: must die for this world war to end. There simply is no other way.

And if you can't see this reality, as tuned in to world events as you seem to be, it is you who needs the shrink, my friend. :shrug: :)

azdaja
Aug 2nd, 2006, 09:57 PM
OK, so I retract the commie comment, although I've gotten distinctly marxist vibes from you in the past. My bad.

Me scared? No. My future is secure one way or t'other. But I have a healthy respect for these Islamo-fascist monkeys; they're doggedly determined, psychotically focused on their objective, and they don't just welcome, but HOPE for death. They must either all be killed or their ideology :hehehe: must die for this world war to end. There simply is no other way.

And if you can't see this reality, as tuned in to world events as you seem to be, it is you who need the shrink, my friend. :shrug: :)
my father was a political prisoner in a commie country, so you can be sure i will never like them. i am still a leftie, though :p

the term islamo-fascist does not mean anything. you are confusing ideologies big time, i can see. each way, i don't see what spectacular things have these people achieved? they seem to do well only in occupied countries where they can pose as freedom fighters. commies did that as well, but they also achieved much more. they created a few powerful states and stuff. islamic fundamentalists of the strain you have in mind can dream about whatever they want, their military power is negligible.

their main power is their ideology, which you seem to underestimate and not understand properly. but you can't fight ideologies with weapons, only with other ideologies. and if you want to sell other ideologies you need to create an environment where such ideologies can grow and thrive. and wars don't create such environment. in fact, the opposite is the case.

JustineTime
Aug 2nd, 2006, 10:34 PM
my father was a political prisoner in a commie country, so you can be sure i will never like them. i am still a leftie, though :p

My condolences. On both counts. :p

the term islamo-fascist does not mean anything. you are confusing ideologies big time, i can see.

Au contraire, mon frere; I've checked this definition before, and it is EXTREMELY apt:

Fascism

A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.



each way, i don't see what spectacular things have these people achieved?
They knocked down a coupla pretty BIG buildings. :shrug: Death and destruction are their forte, but you can't deny their HUGE following, now can you?

they seem to do well only in occupied countries where they can pose as freedom fighters.

See Iran.

commies did that as well, but they also achieved much more. they created a few powerful states and stuff. islamic fundamentalists of the strain you have in mind can dream about whatever they want, their military power is negligible.

Yes, but they continue to spread throughout the world...like cockroaches, n'est-ce pas?

their main power is their ideology, which you seem to underestimate and not understand properly.

AHH! Now we come to the crux of the matter! I underestimate their ideology?! Perhaps you should reread my previous post. ;)

but you can't fight ideologies with weapons, only with other ideologies.

I heartily disagree in this case. But where to strike, where to strike??? :scratch: :hehehe: THAT is the $1,000,000,000.00 question...

and if you want to sell other ideologies you need to create an environment where such ideologies can grow and thrive. and wars don't create such environment. in fact, the opposite is the case.

There are some cases where I would agree with the thrust of this argument, but not in this case. There simply isn't time to win this argument the...ummm...conventional way, know what I mean? Not with Iran on an urgent quest to

http://mud.mm-a8.yimg.com/image/2926975151 (http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0Je5mfLGdFEExIBumeJzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTBkdjU2cm9 hBHBvcwMyMQRzZWMDc3I-/SIG=1i2jlm5od/EXP=1154640715/**http%3a//images.search.yahoo.com/search/images/view%3fback=http%253A%252F%252Fimages.search.yahoo .com%252Fsearch%252Fimages%253Fp%253D%252522mushro om%252Bcloud%252522%2526toggle%253D1%2526ei%253DUT F-8%2526fr%253DFP-tab-web-t400%2526b%253D21%26w=415%26h=340%26imgurl=www.par ascope.com%252Fgallery%252Fgalleryitems%252FhotNuk es%252FcastleBravo.jpg%26rurl=http%253A%252F%252Fw ww.parascope.com%252Fgallery%252Fgalleryitems%252F hotNukes%252FhotNukes06.htm%26size=46.1kB%26name=c astleBravo.jpg%26p=%2522mushroom%2bcloud%2522%26ty pe=jpeg%26no=21%26tt=4,904%26ei=UTF-8)

hold civilization hostage. :shrug:

:tape:

azdaja
Aug 2nd, 2006, 10:55 PM
Au contraire, mon frere; I've checked this definition before, and it is EXTREMELY apt:

Fascism

A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.




it is a shallow definition, but even so it says nothing abut theocracy and apart from nationalism and racism stuff (which are not features of islamic fundamentalism anyway) you could say the rest of it applies to communism as well, so why don't you call them islamo-commies, given that you hate the lefties so much? :p


They knocked down a coupla pretty BIG buildings. :shrug:
scary :shrug: sorry, but i won't support destroying much more buildings and killing much more innocent people because they could kill me or anyone close to me in one of their actions. i will live happily knowing that they want to kill me and one day even might, but i won't have lives of other people on my conscience.


See Iran.
one could argue that even there they were seen as freedom fighters because they fought against a foreign-sponsored dictatorship. a lot of people are sick of them there anyway and their rule is shakey (though threats against their country can give them another chance to pose as freedom fighters). and iran is hardly a powerful country. the us military could defeat it easily and so could armies of a few much weaker european nations.



AHH! Now we come to the crux of the matter! I underestimate their ideology?! Perhaps you should reread my previous post. ;)
because you are reducing it to death and destruction and similar crap which hardly attracts them many followers. the hizbollah offer to their people much more than that. and it is that part that makes them so powerful.

I heartily disagree in this case. But where to strike, where to strike??? :scratch: :hehehe: THAT is the $1,000,000,000.00 question...
you can heartily disagree, it won't change anything. when it gets to ideologies even commiting a genocide wouldn't help. you would need to destroy the planet. perhaps you want that? your sig suggests that you might be one of the american christian fundamentalists.


There are some cases where I would agree with the thrust of this argument, but not in this case. There simply isn't time to win this argument the...ummm...conventional way, know what I mean? Not with Iran on an urgent quest to

http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0Je5mn0GdFENcwAb2yjzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTA4NDgyNWN 0BHNlYwNwcm9m/SIG=12b8qgp6c/EXP=1154640756/**http%3a//www.eyeonsoaps.com/killbrenda/mushroom-cloud.gif

the rest of civilzation. :shrug:

:tape:
there is no imminent threat. iran is laughably weak and that's the most powerful islamic fundamentalist regime on planet. if you are scared of iran how would you have felt in front of nazi germany? and even they were defeated.

sorry, folks, but we are not the cowards who are "afraid" in this business.

Volcana
Aug 5th, 2006, 04:48 AM
"Partially" withdrew. :rolleyes: Even your precious UN verified the withdrawal. :tape:Shebaa Farms.
So pray direct me to a post of yours where you decry Hizbullah's deliberate targeting of Israeli women and children as vehemently (OK, at all), as you do Israel's "mass murder" of Lebanese civilians.This one might do. http://www.wtaworld.com/showthread.php?p=8637587#post8637587
I just LOVE your fair-and-balanced Israel-can-do-no-right manner of posting. Actually, the post I just referred you to, an excellent example of my 'fair-and-balanced Israel-can-do-no-right manner of posting'.

Oy vey! :help: Your kind will only be satisfied when Israel lines up a bunch of its own soldiers and machine guns 'em into a ditch, until the casualty counts are more fair and balanced.The casualty counts, between the comabatants ARE 'fair and balanced' in this particular conflict.
And they ARE going in on the groundYup. It was the only way to do it without murdering a hundred civilians for every Hezbollah fighter. And of course, if you can read, you already know that i actually think the Isrealis have shown restraint. Just not enough.

Of course, none of the above really matters. You believe I'm anti-Israeli, and I don't really care if you believe that or not. We don't know each other. I just care about getting my arguements out there. And judging from responses, people are at least thinking about them. As soon a people start thinking instead of just defending an emotional position as a knee-jerk reaction, I win.

Lord Nelson
Aug 5th, 2006, 01:55 PM
shebaa farms is viewed as being part of golan heights and thus part of Syria by your UN. So no one says that it is part of Lebanon except the Lebanese.

SelesFan70
Aug 5th, 2006, 02:13 PM
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/images/destroy.jpg

Spare me the tears for Lebanon which knowing harbored Hezbollah...in fact spare me the tears for anyone who agrees with this sign..and there are a lot of you out there. :rolleyes:

Pasta-Na
Aug 5th, 2006, 03:13 PM
what kind of person spends most of his time criticizing a country but cant spell the country correctly?

:rolleyes: i dont find ur english is very good as well.

Nimrodg
Aug 5th, 2006, 04:14 PM
Speaking the language of the Middle East



Israel has changed the rules of the game: instead of abductions working against Israel, to the extent of extorting an entire country, abductions now work against abductors and their countries



How does this war differ from others? Well, this is the first time Israel (http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3284752,00.html%20) has began speaking the "Middle East" language. After 60 years the Israel Defense Force has finally began to understand the rules of the region.



This is occurring to the astonishment of our enemies, who are used to seeing Israel stutter in a foreign language, detached from the region. And this is enough to change the Middle East, as the prime minister rightly said.



In the Middle East the stronger party is not attacked but rather the weaker one is, particularly when it is unprepared. Israel attacked the Hizbullah (http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3284023,00.html) unprepared for the campaign. We have created deterrence in the Middle East by using powerful military force, and this deterrence is supposed to work for years.



Attackers will be punished



Yet, Israel has never been able to create deterrence, and if it ever did, it was unintentional. In the Middle East today, it is common knowledge that anyone who dares attack Israel will pay a heavy price, such as the unbearable price of the attacker's complete destruction.



Israel currently understands that it must strike back at the first sign of violation and not wait for years, because it might prove to be too late. Had the IDF redeployed from Lebanon while destroying the south, this war could have been prevented. The same rule applies to the disengagement from Gaza.



The same applies to abduction. Had the IDF responded forcefully in 2000 over the kidnapping of its soldiers, Hizbullah and Iran would not have dared turn the whole of Lebanon into its playground. Israel has reversed the situation: instead of the abduction working against Israel, to the extent of extorting an entire country, the abduction will now work against the abductor and his country.



Stick to reality



The IDF currently understands that there is a deep divide between reality and the declarations of victory made in wars of the Middle East.





Saddam Hussein was defeated in 1991 but nonetheless named the war "the mother of all wars." Egypt suffered a heavy defeat in 1973, yet it still views the consequences of this war as a great victory.



Israel understands that in order to be perceived as a winner, symbolic, psychological actions such as dropping commando fighters into the city of Baalbek, or the assassination of Hizbullah leaders need to be taken. Only measures such as these will provide a sense of security so crucial for future conflicts.



Civilians have never played a role in the Middle East. In the Iran-Iraq war thousands were killed, without it bothering one side or another. Israel however faced the moral obstacle, which was cynically taken advantage of by the opposite side: it chose to hide behind its civilians as it did in the village of Qana in south Lebanon.



Welcome to the Middle East





Israel succeeded in overcoming this obstacle in this war when all the civilians living in the south of Lebanon asked to flee their homes during the temporary ceasefire. Those who didn't bore the consequences.
The IDF's hands are now free to destroy the Hizbullah, which to the organization's astonishment has remained exposed, devoid of its women and children behind whom they seek shelter.





Welcome to the Middle East, Israel. Paradoxically, while incorporating the rules, the Middle East will accept you. This time it has no choice.


(08.03.06, 23:37)



http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3285702,00.html

jmd
Aug 5th, 2006, 05:40 PM
no, arabs are evil. go kill their children and then blame it on them :rolleyes:


stop posting please

trivfun
Aug 5th, 2006, 05:53 PM
Whether you are Arab Muslim, Christian, or Jewish or European Muslim, Christian, or Jewish, you are all nazi-dependent for life.

I reminded of this Antonio Banderas film of Zorro, the first one. Remember who Banderas was a wild guy who got trained by a Anthony Hopkins to beat this Eurocentric sicko in his own game by being more European. If you recall, that sicko put his brother's head in a pickle jar. So, how did European trained Banderas reacted, "you are sick man" and calmly planned his next move. That is how Jews and Muslims react to European man but when it comes to each other forget it. Lets get wild. That is true with all minorities in Asia and Africa.