Tocky on 22/7/2006 at 22:27
Funnily enough Dog, I get most of my news from the BBC. I really should watch Fox sometime just to get the far right position but I haven't in ages. NPR and the papers round out the rest. The far left I can get from you. Too much trouble to go to Hyde park and watch the soapboxers.
What hospital? Not that I don't believe you but I missed that one.
The Golan Heights were returned. Although if not all of it was, I can see why. Strategically the name heights gives it away. Here you go boys launch some from here, you can see for miles. It aint like they haven't launched- forget I ever spoke. I forgot who I was arguing with. This is pointless. I hate that people on both sides are dying. I hope Israel gives up all disputed territory. I hope that ends the violence but I'm sure there will be another reason the Jews must die. Sad situation.
Zygoptera on 23/7/2006 at 04:47
The Golan Heights are part of Syria, and have not been returned.
Note also that all border crossings to/from the West Bank are, and have been since 1967, controlled by Israel, not Jordan (except, of course, on their side of the border) or the PA. The Gaza Strip ones are controlled by Egypt, under direct Israeli supervision.
aguywhoplaysthief on 23/7/2006 at 05:01
Yeah, well the Syrians (and the rest of their assfaced friends) attacked Israel with the intent to destroy, and if Israel wants to take and keep some of their land then they are damn well entitled to do so in my book.
If you can't handle the consequences, then don't play the game.
They should be fucking happy that they got away with what they did and that we didn't drop a big one on their ugly, parched lawn.
It's only "yours" if you can keep it - that's how humanity has worked for millions of years, and anyone who things it's going to change is on crack.
TheGreatGodPan on 23/7/2006 at 05:47
I believe most of the governments of the Middle East genuinely DO want Hezbollah to stop. The ones supporting them are Iran (a Shiite theocracy) and Syria (majority Sunni but controlled by Alawites, who are either a weird sect of Shiites or non-muslims depending on who you ask). Saudi Arabia and Egypt can't stand Iran and the looniness it sponsors. The Sunni countries with disgruntled Shiite populations don't want them getting all riled up. The major exception would be the HAMAS led P.L.O which is buddied up with Hezbollah now and, like them, receiving support from Syria and Iran.
Regarding how poor and oppressed the occupied people are, did you read (
http://volokh.com/posts/1153141591.shtml) the link I posted earlier? They're poor because the region is poor, and they're richer than the other Arabs nearby. Go ahead and say that occupation is bad in and of itself, but don't try to pin the economic problems on Israel.
Rogue Keeper on 24/7/2006 at 08:00
Quote Posted by aguywhoplaysthief
I wonder why so many people seem to take satisfaction in believing that little Israeli girls with felt markers in their hands - not weapons, but felt markers - are evil, or spawned by an evil society. I wonder how those people would feel if Israelis were to look at a photo of a Palestinian child wearing a mock suicide belt in a Hamas demonstration and conclude that all Palestinians - nay, all Arabs - are evil.
And I wonder why it is so difficult to think a little, to get it into our heads that television news and photojournalism manipulate our thoughts and emotions.
Thanks for your care, my eyesight isn't that bad.
What people take satisfaction in believing that little Israeli girls with felt markers in their hands are evil?
If you ask me, any society which allows children to write hails on warheads
isn't quite normal. I don't think Israeli society is very healthy, but then whole Middle East isn't very healthy.
The point is that Israel has better opportunities for manipulation of western people with their own media, because they have better reach on western media than Arabs or, in this case the Lebanonians have.
Another thing is that we usually don't see extremely violent displays of war from some godforsaken country on the opposite side of the globe in western newspapers and TV, because the oversensitive, escapist western audience just isn't used to such hot displays. But for many societies in the Middle East it's almost daily issue to see such things.
And please don't bore me lecturing about media manipulation, I spent few years studying it.
Printer's Devil:Perhaps I was too naive when I was naturally expecting that any intelligent visitor of that site is so smart that he'll be looking for more information sources which would support displays on that site?
Your suggestions were good, you just have used a pretty dumb template for their expression, sorry. It looks as if you were underestimating intelligence of other participants of this thread. Ding.
SubJeff on 24/7/2006 at 16:33
Quote Posted by Strontium Dog
Oh, you mean they meant to bomb those hospitals, and they meant to kill those children? :joke:
Why? Why do you stoop so low? If you are going to have a debate about this then be serious ffs. What hospitals?
Why are you not able to answer the question - What is Israel supposed to do about a militant "army" in S.Lebanon that is firing rockets into Israel? Rockets, I might add, with the
express puropse of killing civilians aimed at civilian targets .
Once again we see the same old pattern; a lesser force antagonises a greater one and suddenly the bleeding hearts whine when the greater force won't stand for it.
SD on 24/7/2006 at 17:12
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
Why are you not able to answer the question - What is Israel supposed to do about a militant "army" in S.Lebanon that is firing rockets into Israel?
Well, it's largely ignored those rocket attacks for the last couple of years, although it's suddenly seen fit to respond in the last few weeks for some reason. But I'm not for one moment questioning Israel's basic right to retaliate against Hezbollah.
What it
doesn't have the right to do is to slaughter civilians in their hundreds while doing Hezbollah precious little damage. Israel's indiscriminatory response is nothing short of criminal, and there is no justification for the number of civilian casualties that it has caused.
Quote:
Rockets, I might add, with the
express puropse of killing civilians aimed at civilian targets.
Funnily enough, while Israel has killed ten times as many civilians as it has Hezbollah militia, Hezbollah has actually killed fewer civilians than it has killed soldiers. But don't let the facts get in the way of a good argument! :joke:
Quote:
Once again we see the same old pattern; a lesser force antagonises a greater one and suddenly the bleeding hearts whine when the greater force won't stand for it.
Yes, I suppose you would see that same old pattern, if you're the kind of person who sees the world in black and white terms.
Chimpy Chompy on 24/7/2006 at 17:22
You've been called on that blowing-up-hospitals claim twice now without backing it up. Not that such a thing is completely outside the realms of possibility, but, links plz.
Some backup on those "civillians killed = 10 times hezbollah killed" would be nice too. That would suggest a total casualty count for Hezbollah of only 30ish.
SubJeff on 24/7/2006 at 17:42
Quote Posted by Strontium Dog
Well, it's largely ignored those rocket attacks for the last couple of years, although it's suddenly seen fit to respond in the last few weeks for some reason.
Perhaps it was the incursion and kidnap of 2 soldiers? And afaik there has been an uneasy peace without any rocket attacks since Israel resited it's borders as per the internationally recognised line.
Quote:
What it
doesn't have the right to do is to slaughter civilians in their hundreds while doing Hezbollah precious little damage. Israel's indiscriminatory response is nothing short of criminal, and there is no justification for the number of civilian casualties that it has caused.
Whilst I fully agree that the death of civilains in these numbers is unacceptable, the fact that you think Hizbullah hasn't been damaged it immaterial. The Israelis are aiming to attack Hizbullah and (as you well know) they, and their arms and infrastructure, are not discreet targets. That they use human shields is THEIR choice. This is the same arguement as the "One man with a gun in amongst a crowd of civilians/kids" we heard so much during the most recent Intifada. IDF policy is to return fire and I agree.
Quote:
Funnily enough, while Israel has killed ten times as many civilians as it has Hezbollah militia, Hezbollah has actually killed fewer civilians than it has killed soldiers. But don't let the facts get in the way of a good argument!
So Hizbullah are crap shots/have less powerful weapons and use human shields. What has that got to do with it? This it what will happen in any case where the same tactics and tools are employed.
SD on 24/7/2006 at 18:14
Quote Posted by Chimpy Chompy
You've been called on that blowing-up-hospitals claim twice now without backing it up. Not that such a thing is completely outside the realms of possibility, but, links plz.
I haven't been "called" on anything. For anyone else unable to Google ISRAEL BOMBS LEBANON HOSPITAL:
(
http://www.juancole.com/2006/07/call-congress-i-got-this-from-cni.html) Please let Congress know that Israel's Total War on Lebanon (they hit the Saint Therese Hospital today) is unacceptable
(
http://www.horsesass.org/my-comments-popup.php?p=1823&c=1#comment-464047) They hit the Saint Therese Hospital in Hadath today
I'm currently trying to get first-hand confirmation of this from my source in Lebanon, so hold tight.
Quote:
Some backup on those "civillians killed = 10 times hezbollah killed" would be nice too. That would suggest a total casualty count for Hezbollah of only 30ish.
(
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5209778.stm) At least 372 Lebanese, the great majority civilians, have been killed during the conflict, which is now into its 13th day. Thirty-seven Israelis have been killed, about half of them civilians.
I admit, I assumed "great majority" to constitute a ratio around 90/10 but it shouldn't be far off that.
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
Perhaps it was the incursion and kidnap of 2 soldiers?
Kidnap is a word we reserve for civilians, like the 9000 or so that Israel holds illegally. The word you are looking for is "capture".
Quote:
Whilst I fully agree that the death of civilains in these numbers is unacceptable, the fact that you think Hizbullah hasn't been damaged it immaterial. The Israelis are aiming to attack Hizbullah and (as you well know) they, and their arms and infrastructure, are not discreet targets. That they use human shields is THEIR choice. This is the same arguement as the "One man with a gun in amongst a crowd of civilians/kids" we heard so much during the most recent Intifada. IDF policy is to return fire and I agree.
Israel doesn't care who it bombs. This is a show of force, to the entire Arab world, but mainly Iran. I'm glad you agree with me that the level of civilian casualties is unacceptable, but I don't believe Israel is doing all it can to minimise that number.
