Get real. If someone was shooting rockets into your house trying to kill you...
POSTED BY: DukKati
UPDATED: Monday, August 14, 2006 05:43
VIEWED: 13192
PAGE 14 of 15
Quote:Sure, you can suggest it.
Originally posted by antimason:
may i suggest as a motive for targeting civilians, that Israel is provoking WW3 as the final phase of the NWO agenda?
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Wow. What a rant.
Okay. Begrudgingly, I came back. I have to say I got a lot of work done in the interim of not being here, which I hope is no offense to anyone here.
Zionomics 101. Feel the hate.
Do I even have to dignify that post with a counter-argument? I suspect not.
So for those who don't know me, I'm from the paleo-con right, and I'm going to throw my lot in with everyone else here and say that dukkati has gone on a lunatic rant that makes lyndon larouche sound sane by comparison.
And, now, for the record:
The senseless and unprovoked war on aggression of Israel against Lebanon and Hezbollah, a legitimate political body within the sovereign state of lebanon is one of the most blatant acts of pure unadorned agression we have seen in the wealthy nations of the world since WWII.
It's not surprising that the zionists have learned well from their master, or that the US press lauds the accomplishments of the aggressors to please the oligarchy, or the singular proxy shareholder.
What astounds me is that anyone falls for it at all. Hero was never particularly quick on the uptake, no offense.
Anyone who thinks that Hezbollah struck first has their chronology completely screwed up, and was clearly not reading the news, but just came in late in the story to read the spin.
When Israel arrested the entire democratically elected govt. of Hamas, the committed an act of war, as it would be in an nation on Earth. In retaliation to Hamas' attempted response (capturing israelis,) Israel hit/captured Hezbollah forces as well as Hamas, and in response to Hezbollah's attempted response (capturing israelis,) Israel bombed lebanon. In response to that, Hezbollah bombed Israel.
This is the really indisputable timeline of actual events. Israel launched an unprovoked attack against a sovereign nation, two of them as far as 90% of the world's nations are concerned (they recognize Palestine.)
Israel is actually 100% in the wrong here, in a way that Germany was 100% in the wrong in 1938 in spain and austria. The failure of the global community to respond as it should resulted in disasterous consequences. I think the people of earth are wiser for it, and will not make the same mistake again.
And for those few (two?) who may be on the "Oh let's go nuke Iran" side, the everyday populous of the world is solidly on one side. Even countries whose govts. strongly support israel, the people are solidly against this action against lebanon and palestine.
If I were the US I'd threaten to cut off the tap if Israel didn't start playing nice
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Oh yipee, more posts.
I want to interject a comment here about Israel targetting civilians deliberately.
Even though I'm appalled by Israel at the moment, I don't have any reason to suspect that this is so.
Think about it. Hezbollah fighters are party of a party militia, which is how they do things in the ME. As such, they're no easier to identify than the michigan militia of timothy mcveigh fame. Israel has to more or less guess where the enemy is, and given their prefered tactic of heavy air assault, they are going to be wrong a fair percentage of the time.
It's sloppy warfare, but it's not reason enough to think that they are deliberately targeting civilians. If that makes them less evil, then it makes them less evil, but they're still very wrong.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Finn et al,
In reading the thread, there is a clear consensus that the deaths of Lebanese civilians due to Israeli military action helps Hezbollah (and is exactly what they are hoping for). So should Israel have done anything differently?
I guess I'm trying to get a feel for what are the different ways to target an asymmetric threat that is embedded in a civilian population. And is force the best option or just the most straight-forward to implement?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yep..Israel arrested the "entire Democratically elected gov. of Hamas" capturing Hezbollah members while doing so...Because unlike Israeli soldiers or any legitimate nation's army. No-one knows who is a soldier for Hezbollah. There is a reason they are not the Lebanese army..They are terrorists and do not want people to know who they are... How many "members" make up Hezbollah? 2000? 2500? 30000? Good luck finding out..Ask the same question about any other army. Quite easy to answer. so who is slow on the uptake?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
They're an organization with a militia. I think that the terrorist thing is a handy stick on label. I'm pretty familiar with the spin.
What I love most is when people start tirading against the arabs and muslims, which shows the true colors of this conflict. I'm a little shocked at how many American are willing to goose step into this new world order. I'm not planning on wasting a lot of time on it.
When you lose the war, we'll watch your war crimes trials on tv. I just hope in the meantime the people of lebanon have a chance to get out. I really do suggest they come here, apply for citizenship and then maye set up an oil company so they can start lobbying washington.
BTW, I'm sorry that the existance of Islam seems to offend people, or the arab political system:
Here's a tip. The reason arab political parties have militias is not that "they are all a bunch of terrorists." It's that they don't have a stable political system like we do, and they can't trust their opponents to follow their orders, not assassinated them, etc.
Here in America, it's quite different. If a republican soldier happens to be in the army when a democrat gets elected, he will follow him orders anyway. It was not always the case. As people might recall when a republican was elected and a large number of democrats got behind their candidate Jefferson Davis, and a civil war ensued. But 150 years of peace and prosperity has given us a level of stability that the lebanese and syrians do not have the benefit of.
I'm sorry, I'm all out of animocity towards arabs. I think they've had a rough break, and we're handing them a rougher one each day, in what essentially does seem to amount to a genocidal campaign to exterminate their race and abolish all remnants of their culture, and while we're at it steal their wealth. Occassionally rape and torture them along the way. So, that sort of thing can make people a might cranky. I understand.
ps. so much for spreading democracy, I see no one in looney jesus rapture land was willing to accept hamas as a govt. once they were voted into office by the majority of the people. Oh well. Maybe we should spread military dictatorship instead, it seems to be what we've got a knack for lately. I think we've haven't had a successful nation build in 50 years, I guess we're out of practice, or maybe we've just started to suck at it.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hi Dream, good to see you back.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Without a preference for either combatant, I note:
Israel claims to not target Lebanese civilians.
Hezballah claims to be attacking Israeli civilians.
Of the 120 or so Israelis killed so far, 2/3 have been military.
Of the 1000 or so Lebanese killed so far, between 60% and 80% have been civilians (depending on whose numbers you use).
Seems like neither side is prosecuting their stated battle plan very well.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
It's sloppy warfare, but it's not reason enough to think that they are deliberately targeting civilians. If that makes them less evil, then it makes them less evil, but they're still very wrong.
There is deliberate, and there is deliberate. Do I think they deliberately point their guns at Qana, rub their hands with glee, and say, "Oh goodie! Unarmed women and children"? No. Do I think they deliberately point their guns at Qana, see that there are unarmed women and children, don't give a cowchip before firing? Yes.
You can say anything you like about the IDF, but you can't call them incompetent. They know what they are doing. Their excuse is that they are sloppy, to ease the intolerance for civilian deaths of their allies. But a close examination of their history show simply that they themselves have no such intolerance. They (the IDF leaders) want to destroy their enemies, and if unarmed women and children are in their way, so be it.
Let's say they (leaders) find that village used to have guns firing on Israel, but now has been abandoned by enemy terrorists. It used to house them, it could house them again--it doesn't matter that only unarmed civilians are there now. They will target it. Then they say, oops, our intelligence was wrong, sorry, collateral damage. In the sense that they didn't make a targeting mistake, the attack is deliberate. But the attack is not deliberately hunting for civilians, like the Hezbollah would. You see? They usually don't go out looking for civilians to kill, but they don't try to avoid them either. At least, that is the way I interpret their pattern of targeting civilians.
However, if some psycho-trigger-happy idiot gets behind the gun and DOES hunt for civilians (like the Hezbollah) the powers appear to be lenient and tacitly tolerant of such aberrant behavior. In this respect, I don't think civilian casualties are just acceptable collateral damage to them. To me, it appears to be more of a perverse perk.
Going back to my example of the ex-terrorist village, now with only innocent civilians. If they (leaders) had to choose between an empty ex-terrorist village and a civilian-filled ex-terrorist village to target, they would pick the one with civilians. Here, everything I said about what they gain with targeting civilians applies. They get some vengeance, drill the hate a little deeper, make a show of power, make sure their money will keep coming in because the war will go on that much longer.
And before anyone implies that I am an anti-semite, again, please note that I am talking about the shit-for-morals who rise to power--not about all Israelis, let alone all Jews. Anyone who thinks I have a veiled prejudice against Jews should read my posts again and notice I say, LEADERS.
(This post has been edited.)
-------
"Maybe she's a lazy hooker. They can't all have hearts of gold and good work ethics." -- Jaye in Wonderfalls
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Without a preference for either combatant, I note:
Israel claims to not target Lebanese civilians.
Hezballah claims to be attacking Israeli civilians.
Of the 120 or so Israelis killed so far, 2/3 have been military.
Of the 1000 or so Lebanese killed so far, between 60% and 80% have been civilians (depending on whose numbers you use).
Seems like neither side is prosecuting their stated battle plan very well.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
Israeli soldiers do not hide behind civilians. What is a Hezbollah "militia member"? Any guy in a beret? Hezbollah just launches rockets into Israel to hit ANYONE. Israel follows suit...just happen to be better at it! Thats news.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME