BF2S Forums Isreal//Lebanon

..teddy..jimmy wrote:

Vilham wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

No they don't. You can't launch a Katyusha from in a building, they also need to be lauched from elevated launch sites to get the required range - lucky Lebanon has lots of remote mountaintops in the middle of nowhere.
The strikes on building have been deliberately targeting civilian infrastructure as well as Hezbollah leadership and planning groups which ARE based in civilian areas. (source for that, the BBC)

I have seen BBC footage that shows the Katyusha missles coming from large holes that have been made in the side of buildings. There has also been footage shown that has had missle launches coming out of these buildings before they were bombed.

Your source is bullshit, i watch BBC every day, at no point have they claimed Israel wants to kill all the civilians, that is what the BBC is about they dont make personal views they just report other peoples views.

Yeah obviously Israel havnt said they are targeting civilians becuase that would just be plain stupid. Howevere, the facts are there and the figures show that many Lebanese civilians are being killed becuase Israel are targeting housing areas. I know that Hezbollah are launching missiles from these housing areas but Israel shouldn't blatently be shooting missiles into these areas because they know there are civilians situated there.

Last edited by Vilham (2006-08-26 07:40:14)

Vilham wrote:

..teddy..jimmy wrote:

Vilham wrote:

I have seen BBC footage that shows the Katyusha missles coming from large holes that have been made in the side of buildings. There has also been footage shown that has had missle launches coming out of these buildings before they were bombed.

Your source is bullshit, i watch BBC every day, at no point have they claimed Israel wants to kill all the civilians, that is what the BBC is about they dont make personal views they just report other peoples views.

Yeah obviously Israel havnt said they are targeting civilians becuase that would just be plain stupid. Howevere, the facts are there and the figures show that many Lebanese civilians are being killed becuase Israel are targeting housing areas. I know that Hezbollah are launching missiles from these housing areas but Israel shouldn't blatently be shooting missiles into these areas because they know there are civilians situated there.

Well if the palestinians told Israel where the sites where they wouldnt get killed by the bombs. Since no one tells Israel where the sites are, if they see missles being launched from those sites you can not expect them to sit back and let it happen, i do not blame them for immediatly bombing such sites, you cant say that they should let themselves be killed rather than kill what in essence is their enemy.

..teddy..jimmy wrote:

Vilham wrote:

..teddy..jimmy wrote:

Yeah obviously Israel havnt said they are targeting civilians becuase that would just be plain stupid. Howevere, the facts are there and the figures show that many Lebanese civilians are being killed becuase Israel are targeting housing areas. I know that Hezbollah are launching missiles from these housing areas but Israel shouldn't blatently be shooting missiles into these areas because they know there are civilians situated there.

Well if the palestinians told Israel where the sites where they wouldnt get killed by the bombs. Since no one tells Israel where the sites are, if they see missles being launched from those sites you can not expect them to sit back and let it happen, i do not blame them for immediatly bombing such sites, you cant say that they should let themselves be killed rather than kill what in essence is their enemy.

We r not talking about the Palestinians. If you are going to debate atleast stick to the topic at hand.
Assuming you mean Hezbollah, why would they reveal thier position. In order to actually fight Israel Hezbollah will need to employ geurillia tac ticcs on Israel. However, I still dont believe that Israel should bomb the hell out of Lebanes civilians because they are fighting against Hezbollah, not Lebanon.

Bertster7 wrote:

Fancy_Pollux wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

No it isn't. Cite me one example of precedent.

Hezbollah does not have a standing uniformed army to meet Israel's and their militants conduct their attacks from civilian neighborhoods.

That is not an example of precedent.

Do you know what an example of precedent is? I was sure you would with your superb education.

Hezbollah do not conduct their attacks from civilian neighbourhoods. They plan their attacks from civilian neighbourhoods. Striking those targets is the only legitimate targeting Israel did during the campaign. The targeting of unrelated civilian infrastructure illegal. The sites they should have been targeting were those that the rockets were being launched from - they did not target these (not entirely true, they did take out a couple of launch locations - which were NOT in civilian centres).

Spumantiii wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Fancy_Pollux wrote:

Hezbollah does not have a standing uniformed army to meet Israel's and their militants conduct their attacks from civilian neighborhoods.

That is not an example of precedent.

Do you know what an example of precedent is? I was sure you would with your superb education.

Hezbollah do not conduct their attacks from civilian neighbourhoods. They plan their attacks from civilian neighbourhoods. Striking those targets is the only legitimate targeting Israel did during the campaign. The targeting of unrelated civilian infrastructure illegal. The sites they should have been targeting were those that the rockets were being launched from - they did not target these (not entirely true, they did take out a couple of launch locations - which were NOT in civilian centres).

precedent: Fallujah, Vietnam, and many other situations, it was right to destroy civilian population

jonsimon wrote:

Spumantiii wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

That is not an example of precedent.

Do you know what an example of precedent is? I was sure you would with your superb education.

Hezbollah do not conduct their attacks from civilian neighbourhoods. They plan their attacks from civilian neighbourhoods. Striking those targets is the only legitimate targeting Israel did during the campaign. The targeting of unrelated civilian infrastructure illegal. The sites they should have been targeting were those that the rockets were being launched from - they did not target these (not entirely true, they did take out a couple of launch locations - which were NOT in civilian centres).

precedent: Fallujah, Vietnam, and many other situations, it was right to destroy civilian population

Riiiiight, tell yourself that. Vietnam? The locals turned on us BECAUSE we didn't stop destroying the civillian population. We burned whole towns just to smoke out some guerillas. And we lost.

It is never morally right to harm non-combatants.

..teddy..jimmy wrote:

So far in the conflict, 827 Lebanese, mostly civilians, have been killed, according to Lebanon Internal Security Forces. The IDF says the Israeli death toll stands at 120, including 38 civilians.

The sources say more than 700 Israelis and 3,200 Lebanese have been wounded.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/08/ … tml-source

Why is it that Israel always insist on killing 8 times more of their enemy and why is the death toll of the enemy mostly civillians?? 
Obviously the economically stronger and militaristically(if its a word) stronger country are going to cause more casualties but you'd think that with the technology of Israels defence system they would kill more actual soldiers than civillians.
   Lets hope the cease fire actually lasts a while to prevent more civillian fuck ups

Vilham wrote:

Depends on what you mean by non-combatants, would you class someone who harbours terrorists or who has knowledge about them but doesnt tell you as non-combatants? Personally i have no sympathy for people that do that.

Last edited by TheCanadianTerrorist (2006-08-26 08:08:28)

jonsimon wrote:

Spumantiii wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

That is not an example of precedent.

Do you know what an example of precedent is? I was sure you would with your superb education.

Hezbollah do not conduct their attacks from civilian neighbourhoods. They plan their attacks from civilian neighbourhoods. Striking those targets is the only legitimate targeting Israel did during the campaign. The targeting of unrelated civilian infrastructure illegal. The sites they should have been targeting were those that the rockets were being launched from - they did not target these (not entirely true, they did take out a couple of launch locations - which were NOT in civilian centres).

precedent: Fallujah, Vietnam, and many other situations, it was right to destroy civilian population

Riiiiight, tell yourself that. Vietnam? The locals turned on us BECAUSE we didn't stop destroying the civillian population. We burned whole towns just to smoke out some guerillas. And we lost.

It is never morally right to harm non-combatants.

Last edited by Spumantiii (2006-08-26 13:16:18)

P581 wrote:

Fancy_Pollux wrote:

Isreal is fighting an enemy that hides behind its own civilians. They launch rockets from civilian neighborhoods, that is why civilian towns are being destroyed. One could attribute the majority of civilian casualties in this conflict to the cowardice of Hezbollah. Isreal is not directly targeting nor eterminating the civilian population. Additionally, Hezbollah generally does not have "soldiers" in uniform that can be distinguished from regular civilians.

This topic has been done to death.

I love this stuff, you jump from thread to thread trying to close lame posts don't you? I'll help you out with a big old thumbs up. Too much crap like this here, no one has an original thought, they just recycle lasts weeks argument with there own words.

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

..teddy..jimmy wrote:

im getting bored of this subject..sorry

As you should be, You started it yet cant stay the course? So you now see that it was beaten to death many times over in the past few weeks. Good for you. Carry on.

Last edited by Vilham (2006-08-27 07:16:35)

Vilham wrote:

If they are involving themselves by helping terrorists they are in the combat! they are INVOLVED!

Thats like saying a cook in an army isnt a combatant, theyARE!