BF2S Forums Israeli Heavy-Handedness

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

no, we all took turns
http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/3528/guiness2av4.png

http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/3279/guiness3qc3.png

Guiness tastes like shit, Stout'sbad enough but a disgusting stout is even worse

HM1{N} wrote:

First of all, you need to stop calling me and other people names, it only shows your ignorance and hatred on a large scale.

Go away and read the other posts on this thread; no-one else has been called names by me except for you. For that i apologise, in the debate its unnecessary and is uncalled for; I'm sorry. For the record, it wasn't hatred as you call it, but pure indignation and anger at your post about a cheap shot. However, it was still uncalled for.

HM1{N} wrote:

2nd:  Hezbolla did not kill civilians, they killed Israeli soldiers, big difference.  And it was a cheap shot, and wrong.  They should not have done that, but Israels response is far worse.  Israel, it appears, was just looking for an excuse to get into Lebanon again, and now, guess what?  They have stated today that they are going to go into Lebanon and occupy the southern portion...hmmm, will it take 20 years to get that land back I wonder? <---Cheap shot also

Hezbollah in Operation Truthful Promise did not kill civilians, i agree and concede that point. They have before and since. It is not, and you will never convince me otherwise that the killing of another human being regardless of race or religion is, a "cheap shot". I believe that it is that attitude that allows the majority of the West to callously disregard both the problems in the middle east and the people of Africa (off topic i know). We simply do not value human life and your reduction of human life to a "cheap shot" throughly sickens me.

HM1{N} wrote:

I agree lives on both sides have been lost, but you are missing the bigger picture here...had Israel never invaded Lebanon to begin with, Hezbollah would not exist and have Israels destruction as their primary goal.  You reap what you sow...

Again agree with half, you do reap what you sow and the current tensions are caused by the disproportionate response by Israel as well as their continued refusal to exchange prisoners. I am not missing the bigger picture, i can see and understand where you are coming from. My problem lies not with your position but on your complete lack of on objectivity. Later on in your post you say that "I am not taking the softy approach, I am only stating facts.  They exist because of Israel.  They are labeled terrorists, yes.  But they exist because of Israel's actions." - Again you have completely missed my point, they are killing people and that is wrong. If you look at your statement you still have not condemned them; "They are labeled terrorists, yes" - not 'they are terrorists', 'they are criminals' but "They are labeled terrorists". Don't get me wrong, Israeli's that kill are criminals too but you have systematically failed at every turn to realise that both sides are in the wrong. Instead you seem more concerned with pointing out the injustices meted out by Israel (and we all know there are quite a few); be more balanced and look at both sides, something which to this point you have singularly failed to do.

HM1{N} wrote:

I agree they have said they won't stop until Israel ceases to exist, and why is that I wonder?  Maybe because for decades Israel has murdered their people stolen their land and forced them to live in squalor, all with the backing of the U.S.A

And the Israelites as they were then had what kind of life under the Ottoman's? Lap of luxury and pink fluffy bunnies? Pick a point in history and one side will have the ascendancy and will be subjugating the other side. Its not a recent thing, it didn't start in the late 40's; this goes back hundreds of years. Again, stop looking at everything from one side.

HM1{N} wrote:

Israel did NOT take what was promised, they took that and then more, A LOT MORE.  Then they refused to give it back and built walls to keep people out.  They moved their military in and killed those that tried to keep their homes.  How can you blame them for trying to take back what it rightfully theirs?  You are consumed by your hatred for them, you can not see objectively, and frankly, it appears that you don't want to...

Yes they did take more than was promised and yes they did setup a state and not a homeland. So we're right back with my original posts, Israel has done wrong and needs to put those wrongs right. If you want to argue about whose land it is, then things could get very interesting depending on how far back you want to go.

I am not consumed by hatred of anyone. I am consumed with frustration at you and your lack of insight. Your understanding of the Arab and Palestinian position is admirable but your complete failure to do so for the Israeli's is getting tiresome. Don't try and twist my words into something else.

HM1{N} wrote:

Yes they do, and I ask you WHY?  Because they have no other means to fight back and get what is rightfully theirs.  The whole world has stated that Israel has no claim or right to that land, but Israel has consistently lifted it's middle finger to the world and said tough crap.  You seem to forget that the Palestinians agreed to the pullout, which I might add, Israel did only partially...how can the Palestinians have their land back when Israel leaves it's military there so they can't move in???

What is rightfully theirs is covered above and below. They do have other means to fight back, ever hear of a bloke called Ghandi? He kept to peaceful protest when the Brits were happily murdering their way across India (we as Brits do seem to be pretty good at that!!). There are alternatives, just like the Israeli's could have petitioned to have their homeland in the lats 40's. As it was they choose what looked (at the time) to be the quick and easy route to getting what they wanted and have been struggling ever since. A central point still remains, for both sides at every step there have been alternatives that they have disregarded for various reasons, be it pride or political ambition or whatever; Israel could exchange prisoners to get their soldiers back instead of demanding them for example.

HM1{N} wrote:

I know that Lebanon knows of the Hezbollah existence, to claim otherwise would be grossly negligent.  My point is that Israels response is wrong.  They are killing innocent civilians, they have no regard for anyone except themselves, as they have shown over the past several decades.  Does Lebanon need to do something about Hezbollah?  Yes.  Will they?  No.  Hezbollah is (pretty much) Lebanon's only defense force...

Israel's response is wrong but Lebanon could have done more to curb the Hezbollah violence inside its own borders. They didn't. Your original point was that Israel gave them 8 hours; they didn't, by your own words "I know that Lebanon knows of the Hezbollah existence, to claim otherwise would be grossly negligent" - so actually they had a damn sight longer then 8 hours didn't they and your presentation of 'fact' is wrong in this instance?

HM1{N} wrote:

The Palestinians made concessions and agreed to the terms of the pullout.  They were then met with an Israeli gunship shelling a beach and killing innocent Palestinian men, women and children vacationing there...what do you really expect their response to be?  Once again the Israeli military was used to kill innocents...it is a vicious cycle of violence that will never end.

Palestinians did make concessions and so did the Israeli's, the trouble was that neither side kept to the agreement. On both sides there were civilians refusing to leave their homes, which lead to the two governments trying to force people to move (never a good idea, but off topic) which led to more violence. But the central point here that I'm trying to make is that it wasn't the Israeli gunship that caused that agreement to fall through (although granted it didn't exactly help and was another example of Israeli's killing civi's), it was a lack of proper planning and thought (another example of what happens when the West tries to shove a 'solution' down peoples throats). The governments made their deal which they didn't consult with their people over. When the deadline to leave came and went, the people refused to go.

HM1{N} wrote:

I never said that it was ONLY Israel's fault, although the root of the problem is traced back to Israels illegal taking of land and murdering of the indigenous population.  Facts are facts, and I am not blinded by the atrocities committed by either side, but seeing as how Israel is a STATE recognized by the U.N., they are held to a greater standard which they have never reached.  They have constantly thumbed their nose at the world and done whatever they want, and they will continue to do so until someone steps in and stops them...

The root of the problem goes much further back then your looking. Start right back at the beginning look at who killed who to get the land and look at the conditions that they forced their "enemies" to live under. You will see that the Israeli's/Israelites are not the only people guilty of atrocity and if you look historically, its the Arabs that killed the Jews in 638 AD. Thats roughly 1,500 years after the Israelites come to that area. If you want to sit there and argue history, I'm quite happy to. The Arabs "stole" the land from the Israelites (well actually the Byzantine Romans, but it was populated by the Israelites at the time) in 638AD and the Israelites "stole" it from the Canaanites in 1200-1100BC.

Facts are facts and the above is fact. If you want to talk about the double standard of "seeing as how Israel is a STATE recognized by the U.N., they are held to a greater standard which they have never reached" then i happy to again, but Cameron and i have covered this before. Why should one group of people be held to an idea that another isn't held to? Cameron response was that he didn't believe they were morally capable; what are your thoughts on it?

Last edited by Jainus (2006-07-17 14:56:21)

Jainus wrote:

HM1{N} wrote:

First of all, you need to stop calling me and other people names, it only shows your ignorance and hatred on a large scale.

Go away and read the other posts on this thread; no-one else has been called names by me except for you. For that i apologise, in the debate its unnecessary and is uncalled for; I'm sorry. For the record, it wasn't hatred as you call it, but pure indignation and anger at your post about a cheap shot. However, it was still uncalled for.

apology accepted

Jainus wrote:

HM1{N} wrote:

2nd:  Hezbolla did not kill civilians, they killed Israeli soldiers, big difference.  And it was a cheap shot, and wrong.  They should not have done that, but Israels response is far worse.  Israel, it appears, was just looking for an excuse to get into Lebanon again, and now, guess what?  They have stated today that they are going to go into Lebanon and occupy the southern portion...hmmm, will it take 20 years to get that land back I wonder? <---Cheap shot also

Hezbollah in Operation Truthful Promise did not kill civilians, i agree and concede that point. They have before and since. It is not, and you will never convince me otherwise that the killing of another human being regardless of race or religion is, a "cheap shot". I believe that it is that attitude that allows the majority of the West to callously disregard both the problems in the middle east and the people of Africa (off topic i know). We simply do not value human life and your reduction of human life to a "cheap shot" throughly sickens me.

I don't feel that human life has been reduced to a cheap shot.  What I do believe is Hezbollah should never have done what they did, during a military operation or otherwise.  Their "timing" is what I label a cheap shot, not their actions which are morally wrong.  I have no love for Hezbollah, regardless of what the forum goers think...

Jainus wrote:

HM1{N} wrote:

I agree lives on both sides have been lost, but you are missing the bigger picture here...had Israel never invaded Lebanon to begin with, Hezbollah would not exist and have Israels destruction as their primary goal.  You reap what you sow...

Again agree with half, you do reap what you sow and the current tensions are caused by the disproportionate response by Israel as well as their continued refusal to exchange prisoners. I am not missing the bigger picture, i can see and understand where you are coming from. My problem lies not with your position but on your complete lack of on objectivity. Later on in your post you say that "I am not taking the softy approach, I am only stating facts.  They exist because of Israel.  They are labeled terrorists, yes.  But they exist because of Israel's actions." - Again you have completely missed my point, they are killing people and that is wrong. If you look at your statement you still have not condemned them; "They are labeled terrorists, yes" - not 'they are terrorists', 'they are criminals' but "They are labeled terrorists". Don't get me wrong, Israeli's that kill are criminals too but you have systematically failed at every turn to realise that both sides are in the wrong. Instead you seem more concerned with pointing out the injustices meted out by Israel (and we all know there are quite a few); be more balanced and look at both sides, something which to this point you have singularly failed to do.

I have stated earlier in my posts that actions on both sides are wrong, I don't need to keep rehashing them over and over.  I'm not missing the point.  The loss of life on both sides should never happen...what you are not seeing is that Israel did indeed start what has now become a war on many fronts because of their expansionist attitude.  If you read my earlier posts, you will see where I laid out the history of the region, all the way back to the 3rd Millenium when the land was owned by the Canaanites (now Palestinians).  It was back then the Jews that invaded the land and murdered the people...something not at all uncommon in history.  I don't really know farther back than those almost 6,000 years, but historical records seem to point at that action as being the start of the conflict we see today.  It is actions such as though that have foster the deep hatred toward Jews in general for thousands of years, and those very same expansionist goals and ideals are still taking place today.

Jainus wrote:

HM1{N} wrote:

I agree they have said they won't stop until Israel ceases to exist, and why is that I wonder?  Maybe because for decades Israel has murdered their people stolen their land and forced them to live in squalor, all with the backing of the U.S.A

And the Israelites as they were then had what kind of life under the Ottoman's? Lap of luxury and pink fluffy bunnies? Pick a point in history and one side will have the ascendancy and will be subjugating the other side. Its not a recent thing, it didn't start in the late 40's; this goes back hundreds of years. Again, stop looking at everything from one side.

You need to go back even further to truly understand what is at the root of today's problems.  Look as far back as the 3rd Millenium BC.

Jainus wrote:

HM1{N} wrote:

Israel did NOT take what was promised, they took that and then more, A LOT MORE.  Then they refused to give it back and built walls to keep people out.  They moved their military in and killed those that tried to keep their homes.  How can you blame them for trying to take back what it rightfully theirs?  You are consumed by your hatred for them, you can not see objectively, and frankly, it appears that you don't want to...

Yes they did take more than was promised and yes they did setup a state and not a homeland. So we're right back with my original posts, Israel has done wrong and needs to put those wrongs right. If you want to argue about whose land it is, then things could get very interesting depending on how far back you want to go.

See comments above, once again the goal of Israel is the same now as it was then...

Jainus wrote:

I am not consumed by hatred of anyone. I am consumed with frustration at you and your lack of insight. Your understanding of the Arab and Palestinian position is admirable but your complete failure to do so for the Israeli's is getting tiresome. Don't try and twist my words into something else.

OK, I'll concede it may not be hatred, but when you resort to name calling, what else can I believe it is???
I have a very broad understanding of what is happening, more so than the average person who will only see what is in front of their face.  When I look at things objectively, I see thousands of years of abuse by the Jews, who, ultimately paid the price in Nazi Germany (and horrifically I might add).  I understand what the Israeli's are facing, who wants to live with suicide bombers and these type of attacks?  But I also understand that Israel's policies and systematic destruction of the indigenous people's lives and homes is at the root of the problem today.  Why is it that Israel took all the good land and gave the Palestinian the landfills for their homes?  Why is it that they supposedly move out of settlements, but keep their troops there so the Palestinians can't move back in?  Why is it that they are allowed to keep a free people penned up like animals, with little or no access to the basic necessities of life: food, water, medical supplies, etc...?  I think it's because it furthers their goals of expansionism.  <--- oversimplified reason.

Jainus wrote:

HM1{N} wrote:

Yes they do, and I ask you WHY?  Because they have no other means to fight back and get what is rightfully theirs.  The whole world has stated that Israel has no claim or right to that land, but Israel has consistently lifted it's middle finger to the world and said tough crap.  You seem to forget that the Palestinians agreed to the pullout, which I might add, Israel did only partially...how can the Palestinians have their land back when Israel leaves it's military there so they can't move in???

What is rightfully theirs is covered above and below. They do have other means to fight back, ever hear of a bloke called Ghandi? He kept to peaceful protest when the Brits were happily murdering their way across India (we as Brits do seem to be pretty good at that!!). There are alternatives, just like the Israeli's could have petitioned to have their homeland in the lats 40's. As it was they choose what looked (at the time) to be the quick and easy route to getting what they wanted and have been struggling ever since. A central point still remains, for both sides at every step there have been alternatives that they have disregarded for various reasons, be it pride or political ambition or whatever; Israel could exchange prisoners to get their soldiers back instead of demanding them for example.

Please don't expect that I am naive enough to believe that peace lovers who advocate non-agressive protestation will win the day.  The Palestinians under the supervision of the UN have tried peace many, many times.  In almost all instances Israel has renigged on their promises.  I ask you this: why aren't the Palestinians free that were part of the prisoner swaps?  The Israelis are...

Jainus wrote:

HM1{N} wrote:

I know that Lebanon knows of the Hezbollah existence, to claim otherwise would be grossly negligent.  My point is that Israels response is wrong.  They are killing innocent civilians, they have no regard for anyone except themselves, as they have shown over the past several decades.  Does Lebanon need to do something about Hezbollah?  Yes.  Will they?  No.  Hezbollah is (pretty much) Lebanon's only defense force...

Israel's response is wrong but Lebanon could have done more to curb the Hezbollah violence inside its own borders. They didn't. Your original point was that Israel gave them 8 hours; they didn't, by your own words "I know that Lebanon knows of the Hezbollah existence, to claim otherwise would be grossly negligent" - so actually they had a damn sight longer then 8 hours didn't they and your presentation of 'fact' is wrong in this instance?

The Lebanese never saw this latest act coming.  Don't forget that Hezbollah holds seats in their government, and is there to protect Lebanon.  Yes hindsight is 20-20, but do you REALLY think anything could have been done when the people of Lebanon are voting Hezbollah in by a landslide?  C'mon now, they are all the Lebanese have to defend themselves...

Jainus wrote:

HM1{N} wrote:

The Palestinians made concessions and agreed to the terms of the pullout.  They were then met with an Israeli gunship shelling a beach and killing innocent Palestinian men, women and children vacationing there...what do you really expect their response to be?  Once again the Israeli military was used to kill innocents...it is a vicious cycle of violence that will never end.

Palestinians did make concessions and so did the Israeli's, the trouble was that neither side kept to the agreement. On both sides there were civilians refusing to leave their homes, which lead to the two governments trying to force people to move (never a good idea, but off topic) which led to more violence. But the central point here that I'm trying to make is that it wasn't the Israeli gunship that caused that agreement to fall through (although granted it didn't exactly help and was another example of Israeli's killing civi's), it was a lack of proper planning and thought (another example of what happens when the West tries to shove a 'solution' down peoples throats). The governments made their deal which they didn't consult with their people over. When the deadline to leave came and went, the people refused to go.

Here's a point where we differ greatly, why are the Palestinians forced to leave their homes?

Jainus wrote:

HM1{N} wrote:

I never said that it was ONLY Israel's fault, although the root of the problem is traced back to Israels illegal taking of land and murdering of the indigenous population.  Facts are facts, and I am not blinded by the atrocities committed by either side, but seeing as how Israel is a STATE recognized by the U.N., they are held to a greater standard which they have never reached.  They have constantly thumbed their nose at the world and done whatever they want, and they will continue to do so until someone steps in and stops them...

The root of the problem goes much further back then your looking. Start right back at the beginning look at who killed who to get the land and look at the conditions that they forced their "enemies" to live under. You will see that the Israeli's/Israelites are not the only people guilty of atrocity and if you look historically, its the Arabs that killed the Jews in 638 AD. Thats roughly 1,500 years after the Israelites come to that area. If you want to sit there and argue history, I'm quite happy to. The Arabs "stole" the land from the Israelites (well actually the Byzantine Romans, but it was populated by the Israelites at the time) in 638AD and the Israelites "stole" it from the Canaanites in 1200-1100BC.

Go back 2000 more years, you will see the Jews murdering the Canaanites back then for land.  This has gone on for thousands of years.  I liken it to Colonists murdering the Native Indians here in the U.S., although the Indians have it a LOT better than the Palestinians.  They have autonomous land, no taxes, self government, and are paid reparations.  Do you think Israel will ever live by those standards and give back all the excess they took?  I really don't.

Jainus wrote:

Facts are facts and the above is fact. If you want to talk about the double standard of "seeing as how Israel is a STATE recognized by the U.N., they are held to a greater standard which they have never reached" then i happy to again, but Cameron and i have covered this before. Why should one group of people be held to an idea that another isn't held to? Cameron response was that he didn't believe they were morally capable; what are your thoughts on it?

The Palestinians ARE held to that standard, but I, like Cameron, believe that neither side is capable of living up to it AT THIS POINT.  Who knows what the future holds?

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

How are those pictures more truthful than mine?

maybe it's because that's how they actually salute each other, where your pics are just of bush waving, or is it just coincidence that several hundred are caught "waving" in the exact same manner at just the moment the shutter clicks?

the nazi salute is just a chewed up version of the roman salute, only with an open fist.

delta4bravo*nl* wrote:

Im sick of crazy muslims, nuke em all.

i really like the way u think....

you guys are all crazy, us Australians and our friendly Kiwi neighbours will fly into outer space and colonise our own planet (with a little help from the brits, who can do it the best) and we will all live happily together. And the world will get into a 3rd world war and everyone will have to come to our planet were the world "superpower" will be SHARED (not too sure if everyone if fimilar with that word) amongst Australia and New Zealand. THE END

read my last post

http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=35163&p=8

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

You are also wrong in your ASSUMPTION that Israel is the terrorists.

Uh, it isn't an assumption.  Assumption would be if he was told there was a country called Israel, and he said "They must be terrorists".  He's using available evidence to come to a conclusion.

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

If you were surrounded By countries on ALL sides who want you ALL eradicated no matter what, you would respond as they are now.

Irrelevant.  Terrorism is using force or threat of force against civilians (some also including civilian property) in order to achieve political aims.  Israel meets these criteria.  Their motivations are unimportant, in this context.

Bubbalo wrote:

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

You are also wrong in your ASSUMPTION that Israel is the terrorists.

Uh, it isn't an assumption.  Assumption would be if he was told there was a country called Israel, and he said "They must be terrorists".  He's using available evidence to come to a conclusion.

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

If you were surrounded By countries on ALL sides who want you ALL eradicated no matter what, you would respond as they are now.

Irrelevant.  Terrorism is using force or threat of force against civilians (some also including civilian property) in order to achieve political aims.  Israel meets these criteria.  Their motivations are unimportant, in this context.

It's obvious that if the hezbozo's didn't hide behind their human shield (Civilians) there would not be as much civilian damage. It is those animals who are causing all the suffering on the Lebanese people.

Someone also stated that Iran stops just short of a pubic hair in saying Israel should be wiped out. Well, I have news for you they have went over the line time and time again.

Iran: “Like it or not, the Zionist regime is heading toward annihilation. The Zionist regime is a rotten, dried tree that will be eliminated by one storm.” Could his analogies get more explicit? “One storm,” eh? Do you suppose this “storm” will produce “fallout”?

Kmarion wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

You are also wrong in your ASSUMPTION that Israel is the terrorists.

Uh, it isn't an assumption.  Assumption would be if he was told there was a country called Israel, and he said "They must be terrorists".  He's using available evidence to come to a conclusion.

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

If you were surrounded By countries on ALL sides who want you ALL eradicated no matter what, you would respond as they are now.

Irrelevant.  Terrorism is using force or threat of force against civilians (some also including civilian property) in order to achieve political aims.  Israel meets these criteria.  Their motivations are unimportant, in this context.

It's obvious that if the hezbozo's didn't hide behind their human shield (Civilians) there would not be as much civilian damage. It is those animals who are causing all the suffering on the Lebanese people.

Someone also stated that Iran stops just short of a pubic hair in saying Israel should be wiped out. Well, I have news for you they have went over the line time and time again.

Iran: “Like it or not, the Zionist regime is heading toward annihilation. The Zionist regime is a rotten, dried tree that will be eliminated by one storm.” Could his analogies get more explicit? “One storm,” eh? Do you suppose this “storm” will produce “fallout”?

They are not hiding behind "human shields", they are hiding period.  Israel is directly targeting civilians and civilian assets: airport, power plant, neighborhoods, etc...the same thing Israel has done for decades (since it's inception).

At last count, the body total is:

Lebanon: 170 dead 168 of them civilians, 2 Hezbollah
Israel: 24 dead, 12 of them soldiers, 12 civilians.

Get a clue...

HM1{N} wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:

Uh, it isn't an assumption.  Assumption would be if he was told there was a country called Israel, and he said "They must be terrorists".  He's using available evidence to come to a conclusion.


Irrelevant.  Terrorism is using force or threat of force against civilians (some also including civilian property) in order to achieve political aims.  Israel meets these criteria.  Their motivations are unimportant, in this context.

It's obvious that if the hezbozo's didn't hide behind their human shield (Civilians) there would not be as much civilian damage. It is those animals who are causing all the suffering on the Lebanese people.

Someone also stated that Iran stops just short of a pubic hair in saying Israel should be wiped out. Well, I have news for you they have went over the line time and time again.

Iran: “Like it or not, the Zionist regime is heading toward annihilation. The Zionist regime is a rotten, dried tree that will be eliminated by one storm.” Could his analogies get more explicit? “One storm,” eh? Do you suppose this “storm” will produce “fallout”?

They are not hiding behind "human shields", they are hiding period.  Israel is directly targeting civilians and civilian assets: airport, power plant, neighborhoods, etc...the same thing Israel has done for decades (since it's inception).

At last count, the body total is:

Lebanon: 170 dead 168 of them civilians, 2 Hezbollah
Israel: 24 dead, 12 of them soldiers, 12 civilians.

Get a clue...

Here is a clue, obviously you need help understanding what I am explaining to you. The Israeli forces are not intentionally hiding weapons and strategic assets amongst innocents in the hope they wont be attacked. If they do attack you will get some moron quoting the amount of innocents that have died verse the terrorist in order to drone up some support for them. Can you really not understand what they are doing? They do not care if their own innocents die if it promotes their cause. They will use any mean they can. They HOPE and PRAY that an Israeli missile takes out children. Because people like you are unable to sort out the grey matter in between .It amazes me the amount of people that can still draw moral equivalence to Terrorist and the civilized world.

Get a clue ?.. man you are way off here buddy, most of the Muslim states have even condemned the Hezbozos.

CameronPoe wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

HM1{N} wrote:

They are not hiding behind "human shields", they are hiding period.  Israel is directly targeting civilians and civilian assets: airport, power plant, neighborhoods, etc...the same thing Israel has done for decades (since it's inception).

At last count, the body total is:

Lebanon: 170 dead 168 of them civilians, 2 Hezbollah
Israel: 24 dead, 12 of them soldiers, 12 civilians.

Get a clue...

Here is a clue, obviously you need help understanding what I am explaining to you. The Israeli forces are not intentionally hiding weapons and strategic assets amongst innocents in the hope they wont be attacked. If they do attack you will get some moron quoting the amount of innocents that have died verse the terrorist in order to drone up some support for them. Can you really not understand what they are doing? They do not care if their own innocents die if it promotes their cause. They will use any mean they can. They HOPE and PRAY that an Israeli missile takes out children. Because people like you are unable to sort out the grey matter in between .It amazes me the amount of people that can still draw moral equivalence to Terrorist and the civilized world.

Get a clue ?.. man you are way off here buddy, most of the Muslim states have even condemned the Hezbozos.

I don't think you understand his poistion at all. Where did he condone or endorse Hezbollah? He hasn't made an incorrect assertion either in stating that Israel is directly targeting civilian assets, in which civilians are more than likely to reside/be. Hezbollah probably do realise that every civilian death in Lebanon plays into their hands - maybe Israel should get a clue and try and come up with a more intelligent response to the recent incidents regarding Hezbollah.... Israel deserves no respect for the way it is acting and have stooped to the level of their enemy, something which I find unacceptable for a 'supposedly' first world 'western' nation.

Understood and noted. I guess I took his explanation and reasoning as his defense of or "endorsement" of what Hezbollah was doing. In all honesty I guess if Israel were to attack any country it should have been Syria or Iran who seem to be directly supporting Hezbollah . Lebanon's problem seems to be it's inability to root Hezbollah out of their country despite UN res 1559 . But you have to understand in some sense of course Israel itself is directly going after the areas from which the attacks are coming.

Let me ask you this. What do you think a country should do if it's soldiers are being abducted and missiles are falling in its third largest city?

Last edited by Kmarion (2006-07-19 07:49:37)