Hizboll'ah Billboard in Windsor

[AndrewL]

From a legal standpoint and from a moral standpoint Israel deserves not one milligram of guilt.

As soon as Hezbollah violated the rules of warfare and placed military material within civilian areas those areas became legitimate targets. Compounding their guilt by using civilian areas to launch attacks and then using the deaths of civilains only deepens my disgust of them. Infrastructure, or As i prefer, bridges and roads are always fair game as that is what belligerents use to move up ammunition.

Btw, the kidnappings of soldier by Hezbollah was just the last straw....they had been firing missiles at civilians for months previously.

So is Israel safer? Yes. Hezbollah lost quite a bit of prestige I doubt they will be provoking Israel any time soon. The biggest failure on Israels part was endi g the war too soon. They should have occupied the entire south and sprayed it with Raid.

Legally Israel violated both US law and international 'norms' by using cluster bombs in civilian areas. The fact that they did this after the cease fire only speaks to the moral depravity of whoever decided that was appropriate.

In general there is nothing moral or ethical in any war by any side.

Yes, rockets fly into israel quite often, still do. This is a crime. If a military response could stop this i would agree. But it is obvious, and has been for some time, that a military solution to this problem is not available. So essentially Israel is engaged in punishment of innocents for lack of political will, i.e., terrorism.

Israel is not safer. They are currently in the worst position with respect to security they have ever been in besides their first war. The fact that Hezbollah fought them to a standstill has rekindled the idea on the Arab street that slowly over time Israel can be defeated by military force. (this is false of course, but the perception is far more important).

Hezbollah gained popularity as a result of this. They did not lose prestige.

Your last sentence just shows how morality depraved you are.

Andrew

Edited August 15, 2007 by AndrewL

[White Doors]

Yes, rockets fly into israel quite often, still do. This is a crime. If a military response could stop this i would agree. But it is obvious, and has been for some time, that a military solution to this problem is not available. So essentially Israel is engaged in punishment of innocents for lack of political will, i.e., terrorism

uhmmm. There are no rockets coming from Lebanon any longer, despite how much you wish they were apparently.

In general there is nothing moral or ethical in any war by any side.

I'd expect this from a kindergarten student, not a grown adult.

Legally Israel violated both US law and international 'norms' by using cluster bombs in civilian areas. The fact that they did this after the cease fire only speaks to the moral depravity of whoever decided that was appropriate.

weird they haven't been indicted on this then is it not?

Your last sentence just shows how morality depraved you are.

au contraire, your moral equivelency is the only thing that is depraved in this discussion.

[AndrewL]

According to the Geneva conventions, Israel, just liek any other country was fully justified in it's response. Hezbollah was violating Geneva conventions in two obvious manners, and probably others as well

1) using civilian Shields

A common israeli practice.

Israel used cluster bombs in civilian areas. And they did this after they agred to a cease fire. This is pure terrorism.

2) not dressing in military unifroms.

lol... i wont defend myself in the wrong clothes....

Are you suggesting that Hezbollah was justified in it's actions?

no.

Also, do you think that Israel and Hezbollah share the same moral platitudes?

Absolutely. And i would add the UK, Canada, US, Russia, Australia, most of europe, most nations and corporations actually.

Please do explain your reasoning.

Please explain how you consider that Israel resorted to terrorism.

thanks

Because there is no military solution to israels problems. This is obvious. They were engaged in punishment through violence. They were trying to sway the minds of the lebanese by causing them to suffer.

Your welcome.

We could do cause and effect back to the 700's first.. actually, we could go back 3500 years for a cause and effect. Who do you think would win that argument?

Exactly. So instead of artificially beginning this conflict at the moment the israeli soldiers were captured, lets pull back and look at the wider conflict they are engaged in and how that came about and what sort of options we think can help solve this equitably for all sides.

Andrew

[M.Dancer]

Your last sentence just shows how morality depraved you are.

Andrew

Morality depraved?

WTF is that?

Not like I'm trying to deflect the guilt over the deaths of civilians. I mean, if I was morally depraved I might suggest that Israel was wrong to defend itself, wrong to attack Hezbollah when they hid amonst the women. No Hezbollah are cockroaches and they should be exterminated.

[M.Dancer]

lol... i wont defend myself in the wrong clothes....

Is this going to be another one of those threads where inspite of not knowing what you are talking about, you keep talking anyway?

...or is the geneva convention only appicable for Israel?

[White Doors]

A common israeli practice.

Israel used cluster bombs in civilian areas. And they did this after they agred to a cease fire. This is pure terrorism.

I see.. A common Israeli tactic. Mind if I don't take your word for it and you present a credible source for that?

thanks!

lol... i wont defend myself in the wrong clothes....

I see that you find it laughable that the Geneva conventions seeks to protect the innocent.

weird that you laugh at that and on the same hand condemn Israel for killing innocents?

How do you reconcile that? The only thing I can think of is anti-semitism.

Please let me know if there is another common bond.

Also, do you think that Israel and Hezbollah share the same moral platitudes?

Absolutely. And i would add the UK, Canada, US, Russia, Australia, most of europe, most nations and corporations actually.

I see. So Hezbollah is no different than Switzerland or Coca-Cola in your mind, How interesting. Wish to explain to us how you think this is so?

Thank you

Because there is no military solution to israels problems. This is obvious. They were engaged in punishment through violence. They were trying to sway the minds of the lebanese by causing them to suffer.

But it did work. Missles are no longer rainign down on Israel from Lebanon and by extention, Hezbollah.

Perhaps it a geographic error on your part?

Exactly. So instead of artificially beginning this conflict at the moment the israeli soldiers were captured, lets pull back and look at the wider conflict they are engaged in and how that came about and what sort of options we think can help solve this equitably for all sides.

Well not randomly showering rockets on Jew Monkey might be a good start.

Edited August 15, 2007 by White Doors

[M.Dancer]

“The cease-fire acted as a life jacket for the organization [at the end of the Second Lebanon War],” a Hizbullah officer said in an interview aired by Channel 10 on Tuesday.

In the interview, the unnamed officer said Hizbullah gunmen would have surrendered if the fighting last summer had continued for another 10 days.

His statement sharply contrasted with those made by Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah on several occasions since the monthlong war. At the end of the war, Nasrallah said his organization had gained a “divine victory.”

.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid...icle%2FShowFull

[M.Dancer]

Israel Artificialy beginning the conflict?

Does andy have a can of words that he shakes and what ever pops out he uses?

[AndrewL]

uhmmm. There are no rockets coming from Lebanon any longer, despite how much you wish they were apparently.

The fact is Hezbolah still possesses that ability. Andno, i don't wish for this. Oh i see, anybody who criticizes israeli policies wants to see all israeli's murdered.. is that right?

I'd expect this from a kindergarten student, not a grown adult.

Actually it is the children who often get excited about war as they run around playing guns. Is that you? Whati expect from grown adults is total condemnation of war to solve differences. In todays world it has become more than obvious that the methods of the madmen of decades ago no longer apply. When you are done glorifying violence maybe you will grow up to see this as well.

Are we done with the personal attacks yet, can we actually discuss the issue?

weird they haven't been indicted on this then is it not?

Thats not weird at all, for those of us who understand how politics work. The US congress is investigating but i would hardly expecting anything genuine. The UN and HRC have both accused Israel and Hezbollah of war crimes, on many occasions.

au contraire, your moral equivelency is the only thing that is depraved in this discussion.

Where is the moral equivalency? Im accusing both sides of being immoral. Certainly they are at least equivalent in that. But neither has achieved my standard of morals. They both have a long way to go before they rise up out of the moral deficiency of religious bases conflicts they constantly engage themselves in.

Andrew

Edited August 15, 2007 by AndrewL

[AndrewL]

Israel Artificialy beginning the conflict?

Does andy have a can of words that he shakes and what ever pops out he uses?

Choose whatever word you want. This conflict does not have a genesis in one violent event. If you want to understand this conflict you really have to pull back and see it in its entirety.

Andrew

[AndrewL]

I see.. A common Israeli tactic. Mind if I don't take your word for it and you present a credible source for that?

thanks!

Palestinians and Israeli human rights groups have regularly complained that Israel uses human shields to stop youths from throwing stones at them, but there has often been no proof.

In March, Israeli human rights group accused Israel's army of using two young Palestinians as human shields during an operation in the West Bank.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6554487.stm

In addition to this Israeli politicians have always used the settlements as human shields and they have always admitted as much. The settlement are a security buffer they always say. And then they place IDF soldiers in them knowing that the settlements are an aggravating factor in the conflict.

I see that you find it laughable that the Geneva conventions seeks to protect the innocent.

weird that you laugh at that and on the same hand condemn Israel for killing innocents?

How do you reconcile that? The only thing I can think of is anti-semitism.

Please let me know if there is another common bond.

I find rules for war to be a joke. The purpose of war is to win. And all nations and groups have shown they will do whatever they can to win. The only important rule for war that exists is the one that forbids all wars of aggression.

I condemn any institution that kills innocents, and not once in this discussion have i taken either side. Im arguing against those who say israel is blameless. We all agree that Hezbollah deserves blame.

Anti-semitism? Did i say anything remotely disparaging against the semitic races of the middle east?

Appealing to the Geneva conventions rules for dressing yourself properly when committing or receiving violence is pathetic. I mean, do you really think those pilots flying at thousands of feet can make out uniforms in the urban areas they are bombing? Have you never even thought about what you are actually saying?

I see. So Hezbollah is no different than Switzerland or Coca-Cola in your mind, How interesting. Wish to explain to us how you think this is so?

All corporations are engaged at some level in ecocide. Ecocide is the same as genocide. And all nations have committed genocide at some point or another. Hezbollah is actually pretty minor compared to the great powers and their crimes.

But it did work. Missles are no longer rainign down on Israel from Lebanon and by extention, Hezbollah.

Perhaps it a geographic error on your part?

Well not randomly showering rockets on Jew Monkey might be a good start.

The goals that Israel set out at the beginning were to eliminate hezbollah, eliminate the rockets, and get the soldiers back. They failed on all counts. Their only accomplishment was to terrorize the lebanese civilians who played no role in the conflict. This makes them the same as Hezbollah but with deadlier weapons.

And early in the conflict Hezbollah would have agreed to the cease fire, sparing many deaths in both israel and lebanon. Prolonging the conflict was pointless.

Andrew

Edited August 15, 2007 by AndrewL

[M.Dancer]

The goals that Israel set out at the beginning were to eliminate hezbollah, eliminate the rockets, and get the soldiers back. They failed on all counts. Their only accomplishment was to terrorize the lebanese civilians who played no role in the conflict. This makes them the same as Hezbollah but with deadlier weapons.

I was wondering when you would get around to justifying Hezboolahs use of human shields,,.......

[White Doors]

haha

I love it when you start to lose your marbles.

this is straight out of the socialist pink book!

Why don;t you jyst copy and past your handbook in your signature?

It would save you the bother of posting.

In addition to this Israeli politicians have always used the settlements as human shields and they have always admitted as much. The settlement are a security buffer they always say. And then they place IDF soldiers in them knowing that the settlements are an aggravating factor in the conflict.

Your definition of 'human shields' needs work.

I find rules for war to be a joke. The purpose of war is to win. And all nations and groups have shown they will do whatever they can to win. The only important rule for war that exists is the one that forbids all wars of aggression.

Rules of war are just that. They are not a joke. They are the rules. Some break them and others fight to uphold them. They might be a joke to you, but that doesn't make the breaking of them any less serious.

I condemn any institution that kills innocents, and not once in this discussion have i taken either side. Im arguing against those who say israel is blameless. We all agree that Hezbollah deserves blame.

War sucks. We get it. Peace good. War bad.

thanks for coming out.

I do not have a problem you pointing out Israel's mistakes. I DO have a problem in your being unable or unwilling to see the differrences in the motivation.

Kind of like the difference between Murder and an Accident. Get it?

All corporations are engaged at some level in ecocide. Ecocide is the same as genocide. And all nations have committed genocide at some point or another. Hezbollah is actually pretty minor compared to the great powers and their crimes.

Wow. you must be a very depressed person.

You see ecocide everyday and are an active enabler of it.

How do you sleep at night?

Anti-semitism? Did i say anything remotely disparaging against the semitic races of the middle east?

Ant-Semitism is commonly and academically the referal of racism against Jews. Not the other semetic races. Are you done thinking you are clever yet?

I'd call it anti-semitism when you casually refer to a murderous terrorist organization and the IDF as being on the same moral compass. Yes, I have no other explanation for it other than that.

Perhaps you could offer me a different option?

And early in the conflict Hezbollah would have agreed to the cease fire, sparing many deaths in both israel and lebanon. Prolonging the conflict was pointless.

Must be nice to be able to read minds.

[Black Dog]

Rules of war are just that. They are not a joke. They are the rules. Some break them and others fight to uphold them. They might be a joke to you, but that doesn't make the breaking of them any less serious.

It takes guts to trot out that line in a thread where you've been defending Israel's bombing campaign against Lebanon.

[mikedavid00]

As much as I don't like restrictions on free speech, I think having one text in Arabic, one in English is seriously misleading, and should be forbidden based on truth in advertising laws. I also think this billboard shows that certain groups are here to wreck us, not join us.

Again I completey agree with jbg.

[mikedavid00]

Israel bears NO responsibility.

I agree!!!

Those scumbags came in Israel and killed then kidnapped their soldiers. Olmert should have invaded and destroyedf them and the Syrians.

Hezbolah are nothing but scumbags, lifes loosers, and have no business bringing their BS to Canada.

I agree!

[jbg]

Is this going to be another one of those threads where inspite of not knowing what you are talking about, you keep talking anyway?

...or is the geneva convention only applicable for Israel?

These multilateral agreements tend to be suicide pacts for law abiding, decent countries. Just as normal citizens register their guns and the Olsens and Bernardos of the world don't countries such as Israel and Canada at least make an effort to compy witht he Geneva Convention. The Arab countries use irregulars to circumvent these conventions, to which they're signatories.

[jbg]

WhatiWhat I expect from grown adults is total condemnation of war to solve differences.

And Mohammed Atta sought to "solve differences" how?

[GostHacked]

Didn't the US at one time have an embassy in Ottawa?

The United States Embassy is the largest foreign embassy in Ottawa. It looks like an aircraft carrier from the side and the top. Back to your regular program.

[White Doors]

It takes guts to trot out that line in a thread where you've been defending Israel's bombing campaign against Lebanon.

Please explain

[August1991]

Rules of war are just that. They are not a joke. They are the rules. Some break them and others fight to uphold them. They might be a joke to you, but that doesn't make the breaking of them any less serious.

You (and others in this thread) seem to judge belligerents by the nastiness of their fighting style.

According to you, Hizballah is bad because they kill innocent civilians while others claim that Israel is bad because it kills innocent civilians. Are we to decide the debate by how nefarious the method of killing?

----

Israel has made peace with Jordan and Egypt. The Palestinian Al-Fatah group has more or less accepted the existence of Israel.

It is Hizballah and Hamas that are two Middle Eastern groups who refuse to accept Israel's right to exist and want to push, in effect, Israel into the sea. I see this point as critical. How can Israel ever come to terms with groups who want its destruction?

I can draw a parallel with bin Laden and Al-Qaeda. They want the West out of Saudi Arabia and out of the Middle East. To achieve this, bin Laden is willing to take this fight on to our shores. In effect, they want the end of our way of operating in the world. We cannot compromise with this.

During the Cold War, the Soviet Union and the US came to a point referred to as "peaceful coexistence". It wasn't always peaceful but at least it had the merit of respecting the status quo. Hizballah, Hamas and Al-Qaeda do not respect the status quo.

[White Doors]

According to you, Hizballah is bad because they kill innocent civilians while others claim that Israel is bad because it kills innocent civilians. Are we to decide the debate by how nefarious the method of killing?

Innocents always die in wars. You can try to minimize it, liek Israel did by doing that commando raid on the apartment building to get the missle launcher rather than bomb it to bits and kil hundreds. Or you can indiscriminately lauch missles at Israeli cities in the hopes of killing some Monkey Jews.

It is the intent that matters most of all. I think any lawyer would agree with me here.

[M.Dancer]

Or to the point, you can intentionally target civilians like terrorists, or you can do what you can to avoid civilian casualties like Israel.

Hezbollah knows Israel will avoid causing civilian deaths when possible, and that is why they hide amongst civilians hoping that in the balance the deaths of 100 civilans will out weigh the deaths of 10 terrorists.

That doen't mean that when Israel attacks and civilans die it is Israel's fault. On the contrary As long as the target's value warrents civilian casulaties are acceptable under international law.

I think a question we should ask is, should Hezbollah and groups like the Taliban and Al Qaeda be protected by the Geneva Convention, given they are neither signatories to it, nor abide by any of its clauses. That doesn't mean The west should ignore the convention regarding endangering civilians, merely is it profitable to give the terrorists legal protection? In other words, if you capture a Hezbollah fighter who is dressed in Civilian clothes, should he be treated as a lawful prisoner of war?

[August1991]

It is the intent that matters most of all. I think any lawyer would agree with me here.

Then how do you explain Truman's decision to kill - with full intent - hundreds of thousands of civilians in Nagasaki and Hiroshima?

[marcinmoka]

Then how do you explain Truman's decision to kill - with full intent - hundreds of thousands of civilians in Nagasaki and Hiroshima?

*The sounds of silence*

But I'll try : A more Machiavellian approach meant to intimidate the Soviets, via brute force. Lord knows it did next to nothing from a tactical point of view. Japan was by and large defeated.

Edited August 16, 2007 by marcinmoka