Israel Blockades Lebanon

lowest form of wit indeed

Interesting response to the writings of an Israeli attached to the Israeli foreign ministry.
 
Here are several opposing points of view. The 'common' explanation for what happened is the viewpoint of Israel, more than one foreign media source is printing 'this' version.

The alternate version, as explained by several news outlets, tells a bit of a different tale: These sources contend that Israel sent a coofftopicndo force into southern Lebanon and was subsequently attacked by Hezbollah near the village of Aitaa al-Chaab, well inside Lebanon's southern territory. It was at this point that an Israel tank was struck by Hezbollah fighters, which resulted in the capture of two Israeli soldiers and the death of six.

As the AFP reported, "According to the Lebanese police force, the two Israeli soldiers were captured in Lebanese territory, in the area of Aitaa al-Chaab, near to the border with Israel, where an Israeli unit had penetrated in middle of morning." And the French news site www.VoltaireNet.org reiterated the same account on June 18, "In a deliberated way, [Israel] sent a coofftopicndo in the Lebanese back-country to Aitaa al-Chaab. It was attacked by Hezbollah, taking two prisoners."

The Associated Press departed from the official version as well. "The militant group Hezbollah captured two Israeli soldiers during clashes Wednesday across the border in southern Lebanon, prompting a swift reaction from Israel, which sent ground forces into its neighbor to look for them," reported Joseph Panossian for AP on July 12. "The forces were trying to keep the soldiers' captors from moving them deeper into Lebanon, Israeli government officials said on condition of anonymity."

While you may say that its propoganda, why should a third party believe Israel more than the Lebanese press or vice versa?
 
You're right thet are being targeted deliberately , by hezbolah firing rockets from civilian areas.
 
So, I never said they did not have their causes....



If their goal is to withdraw, why are they not only going deeper into Lebanon, and making plans to withdraw?

As to security guarentees, there are none...if Israel is going to wait for one, they will be there forever.
 
No, instead of blowing up a bank when it is being robbed we should negotiate so the hostages are not killed.....



I never said that....I said the hatred for Israel is just as reactionary as Israels hatred for their enemies. If you understand the meaning of the word "reactionary" you will understand that all hatred is "reactionary" and the hatred of Israel qualifies as "reactionary".



No, but I imagine a lot more hate Israel for their actions as opposed to their existence. Evidence of this is the massive increase in support for Israels enemies following actions taken by Israel.



He didn't think he was being sarcastic....

How am I wrong? I never said I didn't use the word "nuke" first, I simply said I was using the "nuke" comments in response to firecoins comments.
 
This email again...I have told you many times why you were wrong...but lets go over it one last time...

1. Israel attacks area in which U.N observers are located
2. U.N observer sends an email stating that Hezbollah fighters were using the area and the U.N observers as "shields".
3. The attacks coming from the area stop.
4. The U.N observers are killed, even though Hezbollah was no longer using them as shields...




How can anyone guarentee that no more attacks will occur? The U.S can't stop attacks in Iraq and they are there in full force....
 
No, our support stems from this....

1. The massive Jewish Lobby in the U.S

2. The massive population of Jews in the U.S

3. The support from the Christian population in the U.S because of religous purposes.

4. The Arms Industry Lobby

5. Misplaced Guilt because the Jews were persecuted.
 
massive indeed
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/usjewpop.html
 
That 7 million people can have a major effect....

I admittedly should have left the word "massive" out of that sentence.
 
Again, I just have to ask: what planet are you from? When did you get here, because obviously you've missed the last 60 years of Arab-Israeli hostilities where the Arabs have repeatedly attack Israel, not the other way around. Hezbollah was shooting before the Israeli response, and chances are Hezbollah will still be shooting after all the Israeli troops withdraw.

What I find most interesting in all your conspiracy "land-grab" ********, is you completely ignore the fact that the largest and most valuable piece of real-estate Israel ever took was the Sinai. The same Sinai they returned, forfeiting the oil wells they developed and for-going energy independence in the name of peace. A peace, which to date has held with Egypt in part because of US aid money to both countries guaranteed by the Camp David accords, and in part because the Egyptians actually keep militants from attacking Israel. In other words, unlike the Palestinians, the Lebanese, or Hezbollah, Egypt has kept it's word with Israel and as a result there is no violence between them. Given this history, it seems logical to conclude that if Lebanon were to stop Hezbollah from attacking Israel, Lebanon would have peace with Israel. The same can be said of the Palestinians.
 
What I'm saying is that when a value judgement has to be made, a gov't has the responsibility to place the value on it's own people and interests over others. You don't protect your society within limits, you protect it period. I agree, innocent people should not be killed. You seem to think that being a member of the Israeli army means you are not innocent and therefore should be killed. Yet were those soldiers engaging in hostilities against Lebanon or Hezbollah? No, they were doing their jobs on their side of the border when they were attacked. Just because I'm in the military doesn't mean it's not a crime to break into my home and shoot me. In the current situation, Israel's choice was to allow Hezbollah to cross the border and kill Israelis without fear of response, or engage in military operations to ensure Hezbollah cannot attack Israeli citizens again. They chose, correctly, to protect their people for the future. Their choice was between letting more Israelis die, or risking the deaths of Lebanonese people. In that case, the choice of any gov't is clear.
 
No we are not in Iraq at full force. We are in Iraq, spread thin and governed by Rules of Engagement that severly limit the responses and weapons systems available to the coofftopicnders on the ground. Former CIA analyst Michael Scheur said it best when he describes the "almost dainty application of a mere fraction of our combat power".
 
Why is that impossible? What is so impossible about going door to door, rounding up every member of Hezbollah and sumarily shooting them in the face? If they run away, they're out of Lebanon and no longer an immediate threat. It's only impossible for those who don't have the stomach to actually wage war.
 
Saying this over and over again doesn't make it true. Why don't you prove Israel never ceased it's hostilities against Lebanon. I'd be interested in seeing what you've got, especially since the UN certified Israel had withdrawn completely.

Or is your proof in the same drawer with the proof those pictures were fakes?
 
Blah,blah,blah... again, anyone that knows anything about how the arab world works knows that just as many people would've wanted to join if Israel had not responded because Hezbollah succeeded in carrying out an operation against the jews.
 
United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181. Or do only anti-Israel and anti-US resolutions actually mean anything?
 
Back
Top