BF2S Forums Captured IDF soldiers in Lebanon

ATG wrote:

Okay, a cease fire has been announced but I don't see any mention of the two soldiers return.
So, why'd they stop fighting before the release and if they didn't get them does that mean Hezbollah is right in claiming victory?
Anybody got any info?

It's hard to tell what's going on. Assad, Nasrallah & Ahmedinejad are all giving it "Woohoo! We win!" and Israeli soldiers on the BBC were talking about a major disaster and how they fucked up. Olmert's approval rating is down from 75% to 48%> I couldn't believe I was seeing Israeli soldeirs openly complaining about how their army was being run. They talked of shooting at each other in crossfires and driving tanks into areas where loads of RPG-boys hid waiting - they couldn't see their enemy, were poorly martialled and had to loot to obtain food!! I think Israel fucked up - they expected a six day war and didn't get one. Hezbollah will be thankful of the breather. I'd say they might hand back the two soliders to give themselves extra breathing space but it definitely looks like the Hezzies won this round. I believe Hezbollah are never going to disarm thus violating the resolution and re-starting the war.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2006-08-16 16:16:53)

Thats what I'm saying.
How can this be anything but a breather when NOBODY is preparred to disarm Hezbollah.
btw, they have been a better government that the elected one in Beruit, as far as the day to day needs of the people.
I read today that they have their own ambulance service; brand new GMC trucks!
Go figure.
What a mess.

CameronPoe wrote:

That is the political wing of Hezbollah's cunning: they've made the ordinary populace reliant on the services they provide, services like medical care, education and social welfare.

OMG, you actually made a point I agree with, hooray! +1 for you!

Machiaveli wrote:

I am wondering about one thing. How can you disarm a arm group who manly has arsenal of AK 47 ,m16 and anti tank weapons. I mean those weapons can be any where. I could understand if they had tanks airplanes and other hardware. But AK-47's, even if Israel won the war and they occupied another 20 years. They still wouldn't manage to disarm Hezbollah.

They might be talking about the Katyusha ... try and hide one of those under your bed.   But these are basically ranged artillery pieces which are more of a support weapon and are basically being used in leiu of an airforce to strike at targets across the border.  They are cheap and effective, and seem to be quite good at repelling an invasion from the look of things.  Mainly due to the mobility and hence survivability.  I think they should be given to the Lebanese army and moved back to be 40 or 50 km from the border (they have so far managed to reach a max of 70km), just so that Israel doesn't get any ideas about taking more land by force.

There should have never been a cease fire, the job isn't done, luckily the Hezbollah will start things up again when they are ready.
Makes me wish I could go to another planet.

UnOriginalNuttah wrote:

lowing wrote:

Well, I knew it couldn't last. I was agreeing with everything being posted, hell, even Cameronpoe, then unorginalnuttah shows up spouting how the ME better be on guard in case Israel decides it wants to try and take over the world. sighhhhhhhh...give me strength

If you are questioning the people of southern Lebanon's right to defend themselves then you are clearly more biased than I thought (and believe me, I knew you were biased). 

I would bother to type a big response to that but you'll just read something else into it and response with wild and unfounded exaggerations about what you think I said.

edit: and looking into it, it seems like the political wing of Hezbollah have already suggesting integration of the militia into the armed forces.... http://www.free-lebanon.com/LFPNews/200 … ril23.html

It would appear that the ONLY nations that need to worry about Israel aggression are those that FUCK with it constantly.
As far being biased, guilty!! Please show me how anyone can take a stand on an issue and NOT be biased toward that position. I read your opinions I watch your conspiracy theories videos( without paying the 19.95 for the full version of course ) and I read your links. Yet none of it has convinced me that Bush is Hitler, or America is the 3rd Reich, or Israel, if left unchecked will take over the ME. I also am not convinced by your references that Islamic radicals were in bed with the White House to commit the 911 attacks. I am not convinced that Islamic terrorists agenda is NOT world conversion to Islam and the destruction of the US and Israel and all its allies. I AM convinced however, that your hatred of this administration is more politically motivated, than a question of right or wrong. I could go on.


Your typical response, although I know you can see the intended exaggeration to prove a point in my post. You and that idiot shipbuilder and xietu or whatever his name was ( what ever happened to that guy?) are masters of self proclaimed superior intellect to anyone that challenges you. You wield this tactic when you run out of legitimate rebuttals.

Well if the Lebanese are going to cradle Hezbollah even further, than this is going to one helluva short cease fire.

Last edited by lowing (2006-08-17 03:40:34)

AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:

The Lebanon army that is now moving south has declared "we won't disarm our brothers in Hezbollah".

That's a good thing: any attempt to disarm Hizballah through the army will result in mass defections, leading to bigger problems for Lebanon and Israel.  It's also why a UN force is being sent.

lowing wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:

AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:

The Lebanon army that is now moving south has declared "we won't disarm our brothers in Hezbollah".

That's a good thing: any attempt to disarm Hizballah through the army will result in mass defections, leading to bigger problems for Lebanon and Israel.  It's also why a UN force is being sent.

I can see that bubbalo, but to say it is a good thing, I dunno. For Lebanon to offically legitimize a terror group doesn't sound to good for traveling down the ole' "road map to peace"

Calling them a terror group is quite a generalisation.  They officially condemned the attack on the WTC, and they themselves no longer use suicide tactics.  If you are going to question the legitimacy of a group because of a few acts of terrorism, then let's not forget that the US doesn't exactly have a clean slate.  If a positive commitment towards change is made, then I'd see that as a step in the right direction.

CameronPoe wrote:

lowing wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:

That's a good thing: any attempt to disarm Hizballah through the army will result in mass defections, leading to bigger problems for Lebanon and Israel.  It's also why a UN force is being sent.

I can see that bubbalo, but to say it is a good thing, I dunno. For Lebanon to offically legitimize a terror group doesn't sound to good for traveling down the ole' "road map to peace"

Just a note: "The Road Map For Peace" is a one way freeway to whatever the US and Israel bilaterally decides should happen in the middle east. To include the word "Peace" in the title, as such, is a little bit of a fallacy. You can't have peace by ignoring the concerns of the other parties and refusing to negotiate with them.

good ole' WIKIPEDIA, would suggest a plan a little more diplomatic, with a few more nations involved in its design than you suggest Cameronpoe. Including a separate Palistinian state. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_map_for_peace

AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:

ATG wrote:

Okay, a cease fire has been announced but I don't see any mention of the two soldiers return.
So, why'd they stop fighting before the release and if they didn't get them does that mean Hezbollah is right in claiming victory?
Anybody got any info?

You got it, amazing how effective the UN isn't it.  The Lebanon army that is now moving south has declared "we won't disarm our brothers in Hezbollah".  This is a direct violation of the resolution.  SSDD.

And Israel have never directly violated a UN resolution ever have they....

As for Hezbollah being terrorists - they are extremists, which is not quite the same thing. They have been democratically elected under a fair system. They have not used suicide tactics for many years.
People seem to forget that backing terrorists was a favourite tactic of the US throughout the Cold War. Hezbollah are no more terrorists than Sinn Féin, who have been funded by the US.

UnOriginalNuttah wrote:

lowing wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Just a note: "The Road Map For Peace" is a one way freeway to whatever the US and Israel bilaterally decides should happen in the middle east. To include the word "Peace" in the title, as such, is a little bit of a fallacy. You can't have peace by ignoring the concerns of the other parties and refusing to negotiate with them.

good ole' WIKIPEDIA, would suggest a plan a little more diplomatic, with a few more nations involved in its design than you suggest Cameronpoe. Including a separate Palistinian state. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_map_for_peace

It also says that when Hamas were democratically elected, Israel and the States said they wouldn't deal with them.

Because Israel controls our PACS and almost all levels of our government.  Dealing with them would be in direct violation of Israel's Zionist goals.

Bubbalo wrote:

lowing wrote:

For Lebanon to offically legitimize a terror group

They aren't.  But for them to openly oppose it could mean civil war, and Hizballah came out of the last war stronger than ever.  So far as I'm concerned, I'm happy for the Lebanese government to let others handle it so long as it promotes long term stability.  The longer Lebanon is stable and peaceful, the more likely the Lebanese will turn against Hizballah.

That's exactly right.

People like peace. In a peaceful Lebanon there would be no need for Hezbollah.