130km of Lebanese coastline affected by oil slick

[gerryhatrick]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...8/BNStory/Front

And another storage facility with another 20,000 tonnes of oil in it is on fire.

Why would Israel bomb oil storage facilities on the coast?

It's becoming more and more obvious that the goal of this campaign is to destroy Lebanon completely.

All part of Steve Harper's "measured response" I guess.

[geoffrey]

Besides starting topics when it's already being discussed gerry, you have a point.

It's not about Hezbollah, it's about punishing Lebanese people, Argus has shown this is the case numerous times. The innocent don't matter to Israel, they want to just send a message not to ever f' with them.

[Canuck E Stan]

Besides starting topics when it's already being discussed gerry,

"130km of Lebanese coastline affected by oil slick, That only leaves 95km of coastline. "MEASURED RESPONSE"???"

Am I living in Lebanon?

How many more non-Federal Politics topics is Gerryhatrick going to post in Federal Politics?

Just another Anti-Harper rant by Geryhatrick.

Enough already.

[jdobbin]

I certainly think an oil slick does damage to everyone in the region.

[gerryhatrick]

"130km of Lebanese coastline affected by oil slick, That only leaves 95km of coastline. "MEASURED RESPONSE"???"

How many more non-Federal Politics topics is Gerryhatrick going to post in Federal Politics?

Stephen Harper has emerged as VERY outspoken on the issue of the Israel/Hezbollah war. As per the title, he has called it a "measured response".

He is even now basing a fundraising campaign on his words.

Assuch, items related to the full measure of the response by Israel are obviously related to Canadians reaction to Harpers words.

I understand your reaction, given everything Harper has said on this issue.

[Wilber]

All part of Steve Harper's "measured response" I guess.

Actually it is Israel's "measured response". Canada does not have the capacity to bomb Middle East targets, no matter how much you would somehow like to blame an oil slick off the coast of Lebanon on Harper.

[gerryhatrick]

All part of Steve Harper's "measured response" I guess.

Actually it is Israel's "measured response". Canada does not have the capacity to bomb Middle East targets, no matter how much you would somehow like to blame an oil slick off the coast of Lebanon on Harper.

Oh but I do blame him. He has been complicit by giving Israel carte blanche to carry on. By calling their actions a "measured response" and indicating that it was "inevitable" that violence would "escalate" he both removed the responsibility for Israels actions or the onus for them to cease.

[Rovik]

All part of Steve Harper's "measured response" I guess.

Actually it is Israel's "measured response". Canada does not have the capacity to bomb Middle East targets, no matter how much you would somehow like to blame an oil slick off the coast of Lebanon on Harper.

Actually, he's commenting on Harper's blanket support for Israel by saying that their reaction was not overboard and calling it a "measured response" Of course, this "measured response" includes bombing UN personnel, destroying Red Cross ambulances, killing innocents, obliterating Lebanon's infrastructure such as bridges and roads which hurts Lebanon's economy more than anything else, bombing Beirut's airport, preventing non-residents from fleeing the country and so on and so on. It's plain overkill and it's inflaming Arab moderates who did not support Hezbellah.

Let's face it, Hezbellah has been doing pretty bad things as well (though not on the scale of Isreal) and should be disbanded and yes, Israel has a right to defend itself, but what it is doing now is overkill and almosts borders on arrogance as it disregards the UN and has not be quick to provide safe passage for people fleeing the country or to get relief supplies to the innocents who need it. Israel should have been more selective in its response instead of the blanket response it has used, killing both the bad guys, innocents and anyone else (such as UN personel) who gets in the way. It almost makes the Israelis look as bad as the Hezbellah (of course they are not as bad since they are not psuhing for a nation's destruction such as Hezbellah).

I believe that Harper's support of Israel in this matter will backfire on him. He should have criticized both sides (Israel and Hezbellah) on how things were turning out. He will lose support big-time in Quebec and urban areas in Canada as well as provide fodder for the parties (Libs, NDP, and BQ) in the next election campaign. Overall, his reaction to the whole thing has not been good. Many people will see him as supporting and advocating whatever the Americans say.

[Technocrat]

Good post Rovik

He should have criticized both sides (Israel and Hezbellah)

Bingo. Take a step back and you soon realize that both sides behaviour is unacceptable. Both are at fault for the violence and both are to blame for the death of civillians. It takes a coward to hide amognst civillians but that doens't mean Isreal has the right to bomb the civillians anyway.

Diplomacy is the only way this conflict will end in any lasting and meaningful way.

Side note: How many ordinary Iranians are looking at what Isreal is doing to Lebanon and thinking SHIT... We definitely need nukes now. I don't blame Iran for not wanting to stop developing its nuke technologies. So much for the world becomming a safer place... another failure in the 'global war on terror'.

[watching&waiting]

I am with Harper on this measured response, because if Israel really wanted to they could simply start at the south and proceed north killing everything and everyone who is not on their side. They have that capability and the fact that they have responded with much less power, makes it a measured response. All the Hezbolla have to do is return the kidnapped soldiers, and surrender with acknowledgement of the fact that Israel does have a right to exist. But if the Lebanese people are so stupid to keep enticing the Israelli war effort, they may well see what a full response might be like.

I have no sympathy for the Lebanese people, or their leaders. They voted into power a terrorist government that has done nothing but cause war and strife for the country of Lebabnon. This is all part of what grows from the seeds you planted. Either totally recant your own terrorist government or watch it be destroyed along with the many innocent people. It is time to make sure no terrorist groups are hiding in your neighbourhoods, or you will soon have a flat neighbourhood. It is not going to to be a good day for Lebanon either way, but at least you will be alive.

As far as the UN goes, they will have little or no power to stop any of this. Koffi Aanan is nothing but a thief and scammer and needs to be gone from his posotion there, as he only make the UN have less appeal in the worlds eyes.

[cybercoma]

Good post Rovik

He should have criticized both sides (Israel and Hezbellah)

Bingo. Take a step back and you soon realize that both sides behaviour is unacceptable. Both are at fault for the violence and both are to blame for the death of civillians. It takes a coward to hide amognst civillians but that doens't mean Isreal has the right to bomb the civillians anyway.

Diplomacy is the only way this conflict will end in any lasting and meaningful way.

Side note: How many ordinary Iranians are looking at what Isreal is doing to Lebanon and thinking SHIT... We definitely need nukes now. I don't blame Iran for not wanting to stop developing its nuke technologies. So much for the world becomming a safer place... another failure in the 'global war on terror'.

No, the only way this conflict will end is if the terrorists return the prisoners they kidnapped. Blame them for kidnapping those Israelis and holding the people of Lebanon hostage as Israel fights back.

[theloniusfleabag]

Most of the responses here, as divergent and diverse as they are, can be said to be 'close to the truth'. Just depends on your point of view...

The Hague should warrant a 'world police' before the UN (or in it's place NATO), or any other 'arbitrary conglomeration of interests'. If a Leader of Hizbollah is going to take credit for an attack, then they should be held responsible in a legitimate court of 'law' (The Hague) rather than a court of opinion (the UN).

Further, Lebanon and Israel should have their hands forced; that is, to declare war in the traditional (and legal) sense, and then adhere to the rules set for 'war'. The two that I rate most important, and the ones most are reluctant to shoulder, are; the responsibility for the conquered peoples' (read: 'fiscally responsible for restoring infrastructure') and the body count (in most countries, a political hot potato).

Eveyone in this conflict, including the farthest fringes, are wondering whether or not there is such a thing as 'international law'. That is our greatest challenge at this time in history...can we establish a definition for 'Crime and Punishment ' for all?

[Argus]

All part of Steve Harper's "measured response" I guess.

Actually it is Israel's "measured response". Canada does not have the capacity to bomb Middle East targets, no matter how much you would somehow like to blame an oil slick off the coast of Lebanon on Harper.

Oh but I do blame him. He has been complicit by giving Israel carte blanche to carry on.

Oh please, as if the Israelis base their actions on what Canada thinks or wants or does or says! As if anyone does!

By calling their actions a "measured response" and indicating that it was "inevitable" that violence would "escalate" he both removed the responsibility for Israels actions or the onus for them to cease.

I think what removed the onus on them to cease fire were hundreds of rockets and missiles coming across their border, which, come to think of it, probably prompted the escalation too. If you're looking for cause and effect, sonny, that'd be it. And Israel will continue bombing as long as those missiles keep going across its borders. A year from now, if those missiles are still crossing the border, Israel will still be shelling and bombing. And if that reduces Lebanon to rubble, well, too bad. Jordan had to fight a civil war to keep the Palestinians in control, and there's peace at their borders. The Syrians killed 50,000 people in Hama to destroy the Muslim brotherhood, and nobody is attacking Israel from Syria. Egypt has a large military force along its border, not to deter Israel but to deter crazies from attacking Israel from Egypt. The Lebanese have preferred to just point and clap and shrug their shoulders. As a result, the Israelis have to periodically go in and clean house.

[Argus]

Most of the responses here, as divergent and diverse as they are, can be said to be 'close to the truth'. Just depends on your point of view...

The Hague should warrant a 'world police' before the UN (or in it's place NATO), or any other 'arbitrary conglomeration of interests'. If a Leader of Hizbollah is going to take credit for an attack, then they should be held responsible in a legitimate court of 'law' (The Hague) rather than a court of opinion (the UN).

Further, Lebanon and Israel should have their hands forced; that is, to declare war in the traditional (and legal) sense, and then adhere to the rules set for 'war'. The two that I rate most important, and the ones most are reluctant to shoulder, are; the responsibility for the conquered peoples' (read: 'fiscally responsible for restoring infrastructure') and the body count (in most countries, a political hot potato).

Eveyone in this conflict, including the farthest fringes, are wondering whether or not there is such a thing as 'international law'. That is our greatest challenge at this time in history...can we establish a definition for 'Crime and Punishment ' for all?

Given most of the UN is made up of dictators with little or not interest in the welfare of even their own people, well, unlikely. You think you're going to get the Arab world to agree to condemn terrorism in anything but a mealy-mouthed way which twists the definition to exempt their favourite groups?

[BubberMiley]

When the Israelis eventually use nukes in retaliation to kids throwing rocks at soldiers, how will you justify that 'measured response?"

[Argus]

Good post Rovik

He should have criticized both sides (Israel and Hezbellah)

Bingo. Take a step back and you soon realize that both sides behaviour is unacceptable.

So, you mean, like, when the Nazis invaded Poland, for example, a proper response would have been to criticise both sides equally? I mean, we wouldn't want to take sides, right? Wouldn't want to cease being an "honest broker" And it's not like we can judge that a nation defending itself has somewhat higher moral stance than a terrorist group attacking them.

Both are at fault for the violence and both are to blame for the death of civillians. It takes a coward to hide amognst civillians but that doens't mean Isreal has the right to bomb the civillians anyway.

Actually, it does. It's even legal.

Diplomacy is the only way this conflict will end in any lasting and meaningful way.

How do you negotiate a lasting peace with an organization which states that it's goal is the complete and utter annihilation of your country? I mean, what do you agree to compromise with them? Because they're certainly not going to compromise that goal. Israel left Lebanon completely, remember? That's about as good a compromise as they could possibly have made with Hezbollah. Hezbollah simply moved up to the border and started firing rockets into Israel. What do you want the Israelis to do next? Leave the middle east entirely? Is that your idea of a compromise?

Side note: How many ordinary Iranians are looking at what Isreal is doing to Lebanon and thinking SHIT... We definitely need nukes now.

"Gee, and maybe if they had any brains, and weren't gripped by fanaticism, they'd be saying "Gee, I'm glad we don't have armed groups which fire missiles into Israel just for the hell of it".

[watching&waiting]

When the Israelis eventually use nukes in retaliation to kids throwing rocks at soldiers, how will you justify that 'measured response?"

I would have to say that if Israel ever did use nukes to respond to lebanon, there would be no need for a responce as there would be no one left to respond to. We are talking here about countries that are tiny in area and one or two nukes would wipe all the people from most of the countries from the face of the earth.

So, when Israel gets to the point of using nukes I would say that they then would have chosen an all out use of force and the measured would be long gone. Yes I know you were just posturing when you said this, but what most people need to understand, is that Israel has many times just turned the other cheek, and many times they did respond in small measures. They know that never really worked, so now they respond will growing measure, right up to the time it takes for the Lebanese people to force their leaders to give up the attacks on Israel and recognize Israels right to exist.

It really seems sad to see things having to go this way but the fact that it has, and it is going to continue until there is a final finish to it. I do not think cease fires are the way for this to go. I think this time we should all just let the two countries fight it out to the end. If that means that Lebanon is totally destroyed, then so be it. But for others to step in and force cease fires, is to condemn the area to many more years of small attacks and skirmishes, until it finally ends with the all out war. I think it is far better to let it run its course now then later when nukes will be the defining moment in it all.

[gerryhatrick]

Oh but I do blame him. He has been complicit by giving Israel carte blanche to carry on.

Oh please, as if the Israelis base their actions on what Canada thinks or wants or does or says! As if anyone does!

We cannot know how much Harpers comments have influcenced Israeli policy. His words of support made the news in Jewish media, that is for sure.

It is interesting how Harpers supporters will on the one hand will claim Canada is not listened to in the world when their leadership is saying irresponsible things, yet at the same time are now making noise about Canada reclaiming a place of respect in the world - as if encouraging violence and giving 100% support to Israel = respect.

[gerryhatrick]

I am with Harper on this measured response, because if Israel really wanted to they could simply start at the south and proceed north killing everything and everyone who is not on their side. They have that capability and the fact that they have responded with much less power, makes it a measured response.

By your logic anything less than a nuke is a measured response.

I have a suspicion you're "with Harper" on anything he says, given this bizzarre rationalization.

I have no sympathy for the Lebanese people, or their leaders. They voted into power a terrorist government that has done nothing but cause war and strife for the country of Lebabnon.

What are you talking about? Hezbollah has about 20% of the Lebanese parliament seats. They are not the government.

You have damned the Lebanese people because of their democratic choice?

What about the ones who didn't vote for Hezbollah?

What about the 50 children killed by an IDF bomb today?

No sympathy at all? Why? Oh, because that would perhaps hurt Harper politically. Gotcha.

[Canuck E Stan]

When the Israelis eventually use nukes in retaliation to kids throwing rocks at soldiers, how will you justify that 'measured response?"

I would have to say that if Israel ever did use nukes to respond to lebanon, there would be no need for a responce as there would be no one left to respond to. We are talking here about countries that are tiny in area and one or two nukes would wipe all the people from most of the countries from the face of the earth.

The reality is that if any country will be obliverated by a nuclear bomb it will be Israel by those Arabs who have nuclear weapons.

Iran is just itching to use their nuclear weapons to become the hero to Arabs around the world by destroying Israel.

[BubberMiley]

Iran is just itching to use their nuclear weapons to become the hero to Arabs around the world by destroying Israel.

Since when does Iran have nukes? I thought they just wanted nukes and had a program to get them. I think Pakistan is the only muslim nation with the bomb, or at least the only one we know of that has it.

[WillyNilly]

Some of the comments and posts make absolutely no sense, such as Lebanon was firing HUNDREDS of rockets A DAY across the border at Israel, before Israel invaded, that this was what prompted Israel to attack. Referring to Lebanon as Hitlers army invading Poland, and constant posts about the Lebanese Government being Hezbullah etc.

None of this is true. You can see how irrational people can be, and how they refuse to see or hear the truth about anything.

I also notice a lot of what I see as racist posts on this forum. This racism appears to blind people from reality.

This is a Federal issue in my opinion, because Harper has performed dismally in this, his first International situation and has pretty much pointed to Bush and said "yah what he says".

[WillyNilly]

Abigail Bakan, of the Jewish Women's Committee to End the Occupation, said his popularity will continue to diminish unless he abandons his position.

"We need to make it clear to him that his minority is going to get smaller and smaller as he continues to support Israel's illegal action against the Lebanese and Palestinian people," Bakan told protesters

CTV

Harper will regret his actions or lack of action.

[gerryhatrick]

Iran is just itching to use their nuclear weapons to become the hero to Arabs around the world by destroying Israel.

Since when does Iran have nukes? I thought they just wanted nukes and had a program to get them. I think Pakistan is the only muslim nation with the bomb, or at least the only one we know of that has it.

You are correct that Canuck E Stan is making an assumption to bolster his neo-con tendencies.

There is no proof that Iran has nukes or even a nuke program.

You yourself - who I perceive as honest - have been tricked into thinking there is an indication of an Iranian program to get nukes.

There is no indication that Iranians want nukes and there is no indication that they have a program to get them.

[gerryhatrick]

By calling their actions a "measured response" and indicating that it was "inevitable" that violence would "escalate" he (Harper) both removed the responsibility for Israels actions or the onus for them to cease.

I think what removed the onus on them to cease fire were hundreds of rockets and missiles coming across their border, which, come to think of it, probably prompted the escalation too.

Yes, there has been hundreds of rockets shot into Israel by Hezbollah. They have killed less than 30 Israeli civilians.

How many much larger and more powerful missiles have been fired from jets and warships into Lebanon by Israel? We dont know because Israel provides no count.

After watching some of the bombardments on the news...the constant shelling and airstrikes...I would guess it is in the thousands. Would you doubt that?

There is still some onus on Israel to faciliate a cease fire.