hezbollah its freedom fighter??? bhahahahaha for whos freedom they fight? iran? syria? bin laden?Please can you define terrorist for me? One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter and I get the feeling you describe anyone that disagrees with the US/Israel as terrorists......
Last edited by GATOR591957 (2006-07-31 08:48:50)
Last edited by rawls2 (2006-07-31 08:54:43)
the israelis have used human shield in the pastrawls2 wrote:
Cameron, you acknowledge Hezbollah using human shields and your only response is oh there using underhanded tactics but....cmon man. I notice you went militant on us with your fist sig.
really, when? I would honestly like to know. not sarcasm, genuine curiosity.herrr_smity wrote:
the israelis have used human shield in the pastrawls2 wrote:
Cameron, you acknowledge Hezbollah using human shields and your only response is oh there using underhanded tactics but....cmon man. I notice you went militant on us with your fist sig.
What makes a suicide bombing any better or worse than a non-suicide terrorist bombing, or for that matter a group of soldiers raping and killing innocent civilians? Any acts which violate international law must be dealt with on a case by case basis, in an international court as war crimes. Failure to adhere to such standards yourself forfeits the right to hold others to them.Lisik wrote:
hezbollah its freedom fighter??? bhahahahaha for whos freedom they fight? iran? syria? bin laden?Please can you define terrorist for me? One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter and I get the feeling you describe anyone that disagrees with the US/Israel as terrorists......
ow, the image! actualy it was fisrt image that google gives on "suicide bomber" so i took it without watching! here is another one -
http://www.likud.nl/Jerusalem%20May%2018,%202003.jpg
and btw, why it was cuted to *Graphic Link*
Last edited by UnOriginalNuttah (2006-07-31 09:17:20)
depends where that soldier is at and whether or not they were on duty I guess. say, a soldier deployed is always on duty, but when they are in the states, its a 9 to 5 (well, more hours) job and after work that soldier is the same as regular joe schmoe.UnOriginalNuttah wrote:
What makes a suicide bombing any better or worse than a non-suicide terrorist bombing, or for that matter a group of soldiers raping and killing innocent civilians? Any acts which violate international law must be dealt with on a case by case basis, in an international court as war crimes. Failure to adhere to such standards yourself forfeits the right to hold others to them.Lisik wrote:
hezbollah its freedom fighter??? bhahahahaha for whos freedom they fight? iran? syria? bin laden?Please can you define terrorist for me? One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter and I get the feeling you describe anyone that disagrees with the US/Israel as terrorists......
ow, the image! actualy it was fisrt image that google gives on "suicide bomber" so i took it without watching! here is another one -
http://www.likud.nl/Jerusalem%20May%2018,%202003.jpg
and btw, why it was cuted to *Graphic Link*
On a side note, I've got a question which I genuinely don't know the answer to, maybe someone else knows: Is killing an off-duty, out of uniform soldier, in a covert action a war crime or a legimate guerilla tactic?
Isn't that an oxymoron?UnOriginalNuttah wrote:
legitimate guerilla tactic?
Assuming they just work a 9 to 5 job and are off duty, drinking at a local bar or something then would it be a war crime for a guerilla fighter, knowing that they are a soldier, to shoot them with a sniper rifle? And would the same be true in reverse? I would probably assume yes, but I don't know where international law stands exactly.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
depends where that soldier is at and whether or not they were on duty I guess. say, a soldier deployed is always on duty, but when they are in the states, its a 9 to 5 (well, more hours) job and after work that soldier is the same as regular joe schmoe.
I dont know enough about hezbollah and their use of suicide tactics, but the fuckers in iraq, thats the only way they could hit us and only because of the amount of people that would be taken out. Ive said it many times before, a terrorists wants a fat headline and a body count, thats it. Suicide bombing provides that with the least amount of friendly terrorists being killed.
No. Saying "legitimate terrorist tactic" would be. Guerilla tactics are not by definition illegitimate, depending on circumstance.Erkut.hv wrote:
Isn't that an oxymoron?UnOriginalNuttah wrote:
legitimate guerilla tactic?
Gotcha, point taken.UnOriginalNuttah wrote:
Assuming they just work a 9 to 5 job and are off duty, drinking at a local bar or something then would it be a war crime for a guerilla fighter, knowing that they are a soldier, to shoot them with a sniper rifle? And would the same be true in reverse? I would probably assume yes, but I don't know where international law stands exactly.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
depends where that soldier is at and whether or not they were on duty I guess. say, a soldier deployed is always on duty, but when they are in the states, its a 9 to 5 (well, more hours) job and after work that soldier is the same as regular joe schmoe.
I dont know enough about hezbollah and their use of suicide tactics, but the fuckers in iraq, thats the only way they could hit us and only because of the amount of people that would be taken out. Ive said it many times before, a terrorists wants a fat headline and a body count, thats it. Suicide bombing provides that with the least amount of friendly terrorists being killed.
Regarding Israel using human shields, here's one article, I'm sure other people can dig some more up:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle … 314898.stmNo. Saying "legitimate terrorist tactic" would be. Guerilla tactics are not by definition illegitimate, depending on circumstance.Erkut.hv wrote:
Isn't that an oxymoron?UnOriginalNuttah wrote:
legitimate guerilla tactic?
I dont think they would be considered a guerilla outside of a combat zone. one on one killing, to me, would be considered A) a crime where the police would most certainly be involved B)outside of the battlefield, the "guerilla" would most likely be considered a terrorist. either way, it would be up to the civilian courts most likely to decide what will happen, outside of a warzone ofcourse.UnOriginalNuttah wrote:
Assuming they just work a 9 to 5 job and are off duty, drinking at a local bar or something then would it be a war crime for a guerilla fighter, knowing that they are a soldier, to shoot them with a sniper rifle? And would the same be true in reverse? I would probably assume yes, but I don't know where international law stands exactly.
Regarding Israel using human shields, here's one article, I'm sure other people can dig some more up:
Interesting. Israel declared 'global' war on everyone but itself? If not, I don't quite get your meaning and it hasn't filtered through to google on my searches yet.Lisik wrote:
2 mins ago, prime minister Ehud Olmert declared the global war!
Problems must be solved at the source. Treating the symptoms will not cure the diseased.CameronPoe wrote:
No that's not true - anti-civilian acts are unjust. But I say deal with the original injustice first (the casting out of their homes of millions of Palestinians, without compensation).Jainus wrote:
Its not just the Isaeli's that go for an eye for an eye, they're all at it. And if injustice should never be tolerated then how does that square to your feelings about injustice against Israeli? Let me guess, there have never been injustices against Israel only acts by matyrs against the Evil Empire...CameronPoe wrote:
It's your kind of attitude that sickens me. Tit for tat mindless murder and destruction only deepens problems - it will NEVER solve them. There are other ways of dealing with guerrilla warfare. If I was a Palestinian I wouldn't accept my loss either - injustice should never be tolerated - fight injustice to the bitter end I say.
I am not arguing for Hezbollah. I am arguing against the nature of Israel's response. I realise that you do acknowledge that and that I find Hezbollah despicable for the indiscriminate nature of their attacks. If they want to be respected as an army they should hit ONLY military targets. The same goes for Israel. My fight is for Palestinian justice but it also extends over that of the plight of the innocent Lebanese caught in the melee. Israel have not responded in a measured and precise fashion on many instances during this war, as we have seen most notable with the UN outpost and the house in Q'ana. How many more such instances are we not hearing about? Why doesn't Israel fight Hezbollah the only way they can be fought - ground combat. I've seen the footage on the TV - Hezbollah fires 8 or 9 rockets and about 10-15 minutes later an Israeli jet drops some bombs: the Hezzies having packed up and gone hiding well before the planes arrive. It is obviously that the airstrikes are completely ineffective. The rate of shelling from Hezbollah has hardly decreased below 100 rockets a day for the entire duration of the conflict. Can no-one see the flaws in the Israeli tactics. Given the nature of Israel's treatement of the Palestinians I sometimes wonder whether they just want to punish 'some arabs' regardless of their political persuasion.GATOR591957 wrote:
Cameron, this is where everyone gets upset and feels you are arguing for Hezbolla. When in fact you feel the acts of Hezbolla are deplorable as well. We who have watched this thread throughout know your fight is for Palestine, not Hezbolla. You are using this as a weapon on how blood thirsty Israel is. Frankly Israel has made some mistakes in this battle. You actually have a source on the thread from Israel giving you first hand knowledge of the situation and tactics being used, yet you continue to side with Hezbolla, at least that's the way it seems right now. I don't get it.
Last edited by rawls2 (2006-07-31 10:50:48)
Show me a war in which the civilian deaths are higher than the army you are fighting. That is the problem.rawls2 wrote:
But I challenge anybody to prove there country has gone to war but succeeded in having zero civilian deaths.
IF Hezbollah cared for the Lebanese people. Newsflash: Hezbollah DON'T care about the Lebanese people. Neither, it would seem, do the Israelis. Hezbollah are a Syrian-Iranian enterprise with only their interests at heart. I'm not talking about having a war free of civilian deaths I'm talking about fighting MORE INTELLIGENTLY and PRODUCTIVELY and killing LESS civilians. You can't do that from the comfort of a cockpit. The mindless carnage is just producing MORE HEZZIES as the wronged seek revenge. Why don't Israel take the fight to them and pound them on the ground because evidently their aerial tactic is just not effective (and in fact counter-productive). If you bring the fight into the cities there will be less civilian deaths because it will be more obvious who's a civilian and who isn't.rawls2 wrote:
Israel is bombing all over Lebanon because thats were Hezbollah is, all over.If Hezbollah cared for the Lebanese people Hezbollah would attack from deserted areas and not from civilian areas. If Israel did it from the air or the ground there would still be civilian casualties. There will always be civilian casualties. How many civilians did the IRA kill? Answer that Cameron. I acknowledge my country is also responsible for collateral damage. But I challenge anybody to prove there country has gone to war but succeeded in having zero civilian deaths.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2006-07-31 11:45:00)
You never answered my question so I googled " how many children did Isreal kill today and I got 37.Lisik wrote:
go fuck yourself moron! its not fucking funny!arson wrote:
How many children will your Israel kill today?Lisik wrote:
hezbollah is the one who used thouse people as life sheild!
Arson I don't want to speak for Lisik but I'd like you to think about where he is and the plight he's been under his entire life. If NJ was attacking NY for a few years and you were under attack most of your life you may have a different perspective than say me from AZ.arson wrote:
You never answered my question so I googled " how many children did Isreal kill today and I got 37.Lisik wrote:
go fuck yourself moron! its not fucking funny!arson wrote:
How many children will your Israel kill today?
here is the link
http://freeinternetpress.com/modules.ph … p;sid=7825
You seem pretty hot headed and quick to react without thinking, read the forums rules before you post again. It seems you have a lot in common with your country.
By the way, how many children will your Israel kill TODAY?
So you googled that today, that was yesterday. The guy obviosly called 'NO Joy' at your question why push him?arson belittles people who don't speak good english wrote:
You never answered my question so I googled " how many children did Isreal kill today and I got 37.Lisik wrote:
go fuck yourself moron! its not fucking funny!arson wrote:
How many children will your Israel kill today?
here is the link
http://freeinternetpress.com/modules.ph … p;sid=7825
You seem pretty hot headed and quick to react without thinking, read the forums rules before you post again. It seems you have a lot in common with your country.
By the way, how many children will your Israel kill TODAY?
I would rather think about the people of Lebannon who are under attack and whos lives are now over.GATOR591957 wrote:
Arson I don't want to speak for Lisik but I'd like you to think about where he is and the plight he's been under his entire life. If NJ was attacking NY for a few years and you were under attack most of your life you may have a different perspective than say me from AZ.arson wrote:
You never answered my question so I googled " how many children did Isreal kill today and I got 37.Lisik wrote:
go fuck yourself moron! its not fucking funny!
here is the link
http://freeinternetpress.com/modules.ph … p;sid=7825
You seem pretty hot headed and quick to react without thinking, read the forums rules before you post again. It seems you have a lot in common with your country.
By the way, how many children will your Israel kill TODAY?
I understand where Lisik's frustration comes from, I just don't understand how one could condone killing civilians. There is no way Israel will win this "war" by continuing what it is doing. Is winning what they (Israel) wants? I was under the impression that Israel is attacking southern Lebanon to maintain the security and integrity of Israel's borders. Nothing they are doing is helping that, in fact its probably undermining the security of Israeli citizens and its borders.GATOR591957 wrote:
Arson I don't want to speak for Lisik but I'd like you to think about where he is and the plight he's been under his entire life. If NJ was attacking NY for a few years and you were under attack most of your life you may have a different perspective than say me from AZ.
