The Middle East spirals out of control!

It’s been a long time since I last entered this forum (I think my previous user has been deleted). I never felt like posting anything (guess I’m more interested in reading about other peoples’ thoughts). But being Israeli, I am interested in reading about other people’s opinions of the situation (and by other people, I don’t mean politicians or news-reporters), so I decided to check this forums up. After 6 pages of reading about everything from the fighting in Lebanon, to the philosophy behind the saying “might indeed does make right”, to reading about the hidden “agendas” and “schemes” of the “Zionists” to conquer all, I’ve finally “broken” and decided to post my thoughts.
I'd like to apologies in advance for any grammar or spelling mistake that I might make. English is not my native language.

First of all, in difference of some other people’s “neutral” and “non-biased” opinions about the situation, I don’t claim my opinions to be any such thing. And I don’t think anyone can rightfully claim that he-himself\she-herself is un-biased. Especially if they have personal connection to the conflict at hand.

In response to the claims that Israel need to back down now:
Don’t forget that Israel has retaliated for 2 main reasons that we have yet to accomplish: The safely return of the 2 abducted soldiers and the retreat of the Hezbollah forces from southern Lebanon.
I honestly don’t think there is any reason to expand on the reasoning for these 2 goals. Any other country that would have been so unrighteously provoked by another terrorist organization, would undoubtedly done the same, if not much more. Besides, if we back down now, Hezbollah will see it as a victory, and it will only be a matter of time until it decides to act again. This is an opportunity that we didn’t seek, but rather, was forced onto us. And the fact is that according to all the major polls conducted by all the big newspapers in Israel, 88-90 percents of the Israelis, want to seize this opportunity to rid us of Hezbollah once and for all. Israelis are usually divided in opinions as to what’s the best thing to do, how to react, etc… Never in my 20 years of existence, have I seen such a consensus among the Israeli people. And can you really blame us?

Also, don’t go telling me that Israel is using excessive force. If your (yes, you reading this, your) country wouldn’t have done the same for your soldiers (and let us not forget the citizens that were bombarded by Hezbollah’s Katyusha rockets during that Wednesday morning, in order to cover the kidnapping of the soldiers), then the problem is with your country, not mine.

For all those who say that Israel is attacking civilian targets (and I won’t go into quotes here, cause it seems there’s a hefty bunch of them), all I can say, is that it’s war, and in war there are casualties. Believe me that no one in Israel is extremely happy at the death of innocent civilians, and it surely doesn’t serve our goals (on the contrary). But you can’t expect us to retaliate against a terrorist organization (militia, country, or whatever you wish to call them) without some casualties. That would be an unreasonable demand. In fact, IDF has actually warned the citizens that live in the areas that were bombarded beforehand, even though it also gave warning to the terrorists in those areas. If, for whatever reason, some citizens chose to stay in those areas, then that’s their choice, and you can’t hold us responsible for their lives. If someone would rather stay with his\her possessions than save their lives, maybe they aren’t that innocent…
The heads of Hezbollah know that Israel is reluctant to bombard civilian infrastructures, and that’s why they hide their ammunition in residential areas, in mosques and other such places.

The fact is that Israel is much more selective of its targets than most other countries (Russia and the Chechen Republic, and the U.S. and Iraq and Afghanistan are 2 examples). And if the situation was the other way around (with us and the Hezbollah) I probably wouldn’t be sitting here right now (not to mention, being able to sit at all, ever).

It’s very easy to condemn Israel and state that it should restrain its force, when you’re sitting miles away in your safe homes, in front of your computers. But if it was the U.K., the U.S., Germany, France, Australia or any other modern – liberal – peace-keeping country that would have been so brutally attacked by another country\organization-within-a-country, it would have retaliated with all its might.

Not only that, but even the Arab countries are suspiciously quiet about the Israeli retaliation. Else wise, why did the Arab summit fail. I for one, was expecting them to condemn Israel. I actually sat in disbelief when I heard that they didn’t reach an agreement. Not even the Arab countries condemn Israel’s actions. What other reasoning do you possibly need?

Finally, if you expect us to just sit quietly while constantly being threatened (verbally as well as physically) and provoked, then you’re just being naïve. No Israeli is extremely happy about sending our soldiers (sons and daughters, brothers and sisters, grand-children, spouses) to war, but sometimes, your enemies cross the line (literally) and leave you no choice.

Sorry for the long post...

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Quote:

Do you honestly think that this war will help improve your situation at all?

Well, we really only have a few choices, don't we?
No military action at all, is unacceptable, since it will only encourage Hezbollah to continue. Negotiations for the exchange of prisoners are out of question, for the same reason.
The Lebanese government obviously, wasn't willing to do anything against Hezbollah. And approaching the international community is just a waste of time. Both of these routs lead to negotiations and prisoner exchanges.

On the other hand (and I know I didn't go through all the alternatives above). For the first time, the Lebanese government is starting to realize that the Hezbollah is just a liability, by hinting that the Hezbollah is somewhat to blame for the current situation (I don't remember the exact quote, but their PM has said that the Lebanese people are paying for the Hezbollah's actions). And honestly, if they want to govern Lebanon, they need to take some responsibility, the Hezbollah does have 23 seats in the parliament and an army of its own. No country can afford to have an army that is not directly controlled by the government.
Also, I do honestly think that Hezbollah was taken aback a bit by the Israeli reaction. I think they anticipated the situation would be more like after the kidnapping of the 3 Israeli soldiers awhile ago (right after the pull out from Lebanon). Maybe next time they'll hesitate a bit (if, god forbid, there will be a next time).

The Hezbollah may be able to retreat, but if the Lebanese government will decide to act against Hezbollah either by themselves, or by using international assistance, then we did made a difference. But they have to acknowledge that letting the Hezbollah be, is only going to damage themselves. They did manage to get Syria's troops out of Lebanon. And memory serve, Syria is much stronger than Hezbollah.

I think that most of the nations in the region (except for Syria and Iran, obviously), are all for the disarm of Hezbollah. The problem is that no one is actually doing anything. And if no one else take the initiative, then we have to defend ourselves. And that we did. Unfortunately, innocent civilians are getting harmed, on both sides.

The problem is that negotiating with terrorists is pointless and futile. It doesn't matter that we pulled out of Lebanon, now Hezbollah is "fighting for the Palestinians", even if we resolve the conflict with the Palestinians, there will always be other things to fight over. At some point, you have to make an end to this.
The Lebanese probably hate us right now, but if Hezbollah is destroyed, and we pull out of Lebanon (I don't think a single Israeli really wants to stay there for any longer than is absolutely necessary (too many bad memories)), there would be no reason to form another terrorists organization.
I know it's kinda optimistic, but if we do nothing, the next time is just going to be harder on both sides. With Hezbollah having a larger arsenal of more diverse weapons, longer range rockets and missiles, and maybe some other stuff the Iranians will decide to give them.

Maybe we won't be able to surrender the Hezbollah completely, but we are definitely making change. If we pull back now, the Hezbollah will see it as a victory (a tie with Israel, is victory enough for them). They obviously don't rely only on straight facts, when representing their arguments to the people. Thus, at the end of the day, it should be clear beyond any doubt, that the Hezbollah's actions are just undermining the Lebanese interests. And that the Hezbollah hasn't accomplished any of its goals in the attack. Any less of that, will just result in us having the same discussion in a few years.

As for the Palestinian problem, well, I don't really see the connection. Hezbollah has nothing to do with the Palestinians. If they're so into helping others, they should start with "their own" country and invest more money in the reconstruction of Lebanon, than in arming themselves.

As for aiding the Lebanese government. I don't think they'd take any assistance from Israel. Even before the fighting has began. Even if we did offer assistance (and we don't exactly have extra cash. Believe me, the budget in Israel is as tight as it gets. And even then, we're assisting the Palestinians: with electricity, water, health care, and even giving them money (at least before the Hamas was elected).
I think the aiding part should be left to the rest of the world. But you're right, a prosperous Lebanon is in our best interests. It's just that getting aid from Israel isn't going to look good to the Lebanese people, and definitely won't help their government with the public support.

Quote:

Attempting to excuse atrocity by comparison, though, doesn't really excuse anything.

Obviously, you're right. I was in no way trying to compare us to them. I only wanted to strengthen the fact that IDF is not just targeting civilian targets in order to cause as much damage as possible (as opposed to the Hezbollah, that would have gladly "wiped us all off the map"). If we wanted to do that, it wouldn't have taken 10 days (or is it 11, I'm losing the count).

Quote:

I like how the leader of Hezbollah claimed that the two Palestinian kids they killed with Katjusha rockets were Martyrs for Palestine. As if he had the right to declare it.

Yeah, that was kinda insolent, to say the least.

Quote:

Not really. Hezbollah represents a large Shi'a contingent, and actively represents the interests of Iran and Syria. The Arab nations haven't forgotten how Iran was prepared to march the Basij across the Middle East in the 80's. If Israel is going to act as a buffer to their influence, then Israel's neighbors, and the other members of the Arab league aren't going to look to stop them.

Even Iran and Syria aren't as loud as they usually are. Nasrallah was very eager to deny any Iranian involvement in the current conflict...

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Close diplomatic relationship with Beirut, and supporting the Lebanese government is kinda problematic right now. The Lebanese government (rightfully) doesn’t want any aid from Israel. Because, let’s be frank, Israel is not very popular in the Arab world (to say the least) and getting aid from Israel will only help Hezbollah get more momentum in the Lebanese political arena. They will illustrate the current Lebanese government as a supporter of Israel, maybe even as a puppet\proxy government, that gives in to Israel and the U.S. .
Any aid that the Lebanese government is going to get from Israel will only damage their image in the Lebanese public opinion. I’m all for the reconstruction of Lebanon, but the aid shouldn’t come from Israel, or we’ll risk the (oh so fragile) stability of the Lebanese government.

The bombardment of civilian infrastructures has a very real strategic purpose in the fighting against Hezbollah. If their roads are destroyed, the Hezbollah will find it that much harder to move its rockets to strategic launching positions. It will take them longer to move troops. The Hezbollah leaders will find it more difficult to move from one hideout to another. The bombardment of the air and sea ports, obviously serves the same purpose, with emphasis on the smuggling of weaponry from Iran. Moving the 2 Israeli soldiers to Syria or Iran, probably hasn’t gotten any easier, either.
Civilian buildings are used by the Hezbollah to hide ammunition and supplies. If we want to damage Hezbollah, we have to thin out its arsenal. If we don’t want them to launch rockets at our towns and cities, we have to take that ability from them.

As for the formation of other terrorist organizations after the fighting is done. If we just assume that whatever military action we take, will lead to more terror, then maybe we shouldn’t retaliate at all. Maybe we should just sit at our homes, scared to move a muscle, because we don’t want to offend the Lebanese people. I personally think that doing nothing, just waiting for the next unprovoked attack, will not only accomplish nothing, but will also encourage the Hezbollah to act again, and more boldly. Doing too little, will have the same effect.

Hezbollah is used by now to small and pointless counter attacks (destroying a few deserted terrorist camps in the middle of nowhere). Only a retaliation that will threaten the organization and its leaders’ very existence could serve.

The all point of this operation is the dismantle of Hezbollah and the deployment of the Lebanese army along its southern border. If the Lebanese government will gain control of its country, then I don’t see too great a threat of other terrorist groups, such as Hezbollah, rising in Lebanon. They had 6 years to disarm Hezbollah with whatever means they would have chosen to. If it has had to come to that in order for them to realize the importance of getting rid of all terrorist organizations within their country (even risking fighting their own people), then… well... tough.

Most amazing jew boots

Quote:

I only meant to point out that Israel doesn't seem to be so "careful" or selective with their targeting as it's been stated here.

I still stand by my claim. In war there are casualties, and some mistakes are made (some of these mistakes are hurting our own troops. Just a couple of days ago, some Israeli soldiers were hit by friendly fire from one of our own helicopters). It doesn't mean that we intentionally hit this ambulance and other civilians. We gain absolutely nothing from hitting civilians. Except for more political pressure to end the conflict, that is...
With over 4,000 sorties of our air crafts, some mistakes and some casualties are to be expected...

Also, you seem to forget that over 2,000 rockets have been shot by Hezbollah into Israeli territory. THESE rockets ARE aimed at civilians.
30% out of the 280,000 residents of Haifa have left their homes, and that's just Haifa. Are they not refugees? Many houses and businesses have been damaged in northern Israel. The difference is that the Israeli civilians are been targeted.

Yet it seems that you expect us to lay low and do nothing.
You can argue that the number of casualties in Israel is much lower than in Lebanon. But what did you expect? Do you want us to drop one bomb for every rocket they launch? Do you expect us to wait until we'll have enough casualties to justify the number of casualties on the other side? Did you think that our missiles will do the same damage as theirs?

It's impossible to fight terror without casualties. And as much as I'm sorry for every innocent civilian that's getting hurt (on either side). I still don't think that we are using any more force than any other country would have used in our stead, despite what they say when it's not them that is being attacked.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord Styphon
If this happened once or twice, maybe it could be wracked up to honest mistakes.

How many civilian casualties were there during the U.S. war against Afghanistan? How many innocent civilians, do you think, have lost their lives during the attack of NATO forces in Kosovo? In war, there are casualties. Nothing can change that. The finest army in the world, having as much time as it needs, choosing its targets as carefully as possible, will never be able to avoid casualties.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord Styphon
Israel's campaign also looks less and less like it is intended to simply fight Hezbollah. The airport has been bombed, the country is under a blockade, and among the various other Lebanese civilian infrastructure destroyed is a dairy factory, of all things. None of this hurts Hezbollah, unless they raise a significant amount of money through sales of dairy products (which is in the realm of possibility, I suppose). On the other hand, it does serve to very neatly strangle Lebanon.

The bombing of the airport, and the blockade on Lebanon, serve to stop (or at least to thin) the smuggling of arms from Iran and Syria. As for the dairy factory, I’m not familiar with this specific incident, but considering the fact that Hezbollah is hiding rockets and missiles in residential areas, mosques, and other innocent-looking places, it doesn’t seem that far-fetched that the Hezbollah is also using factories to hide weaponry and ammunition.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TonyDaTigger
I don't expect you to lay low and do nothing. Some of us live in the real world where there ARE people out there willing to kill you just for religion or national identity.

I obviously wasn’t referring to you, TonyDaTigger. And I really do appreciate the support …

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rock

Comparing yourself to Hezbollah is futile. Do you honestly think the deliberate killing of civilians ist justified because Hezbollah does the same? By this logic, you are terrorists yourselves…

I wasn’t comparing our actions to the Hezbollah’s. I was saying that innocent civilians also suffer on this side of the border. Also, if you read carefully, you’ll see that I was clearly stating that the Hezbollah is targeting civilians IN CONTRAST to the IDF who does NOT target civilians. IDF targets Hezbollah terrorists and Hezbollah weaponry. The Hezbollah is using civilians as live shields, and that’s why innocent Lebanese are being hurt. Not because IDF specifically targets them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rock
…There is no denying that Hezbollah's attacks are wrong, but they don't make your actions any more right!

The Hezbollah’s actions don’t make our actions right. The need to protect our citizens does.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rock
No, but a solid, armed U.N. mission to southern Lebanon and supporting Beirut establish a stable and substantial government could have been an alternative worth considering. Isolating Lebanon and Syria only sparks the flames in this conflict.

If the UN or the Lebanese government would have done their job, none of this would have happened in the first place. And as Bradylama has stated, the only reason that the world is talking about sending an armed force (that is actually capable of doing something) to the region, is because of the Israeli retaliation. Though, you might understand our skepticism of the effectiveness of such a force, considering the recent (and not so recent) events.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Okay then…

Lord Styphon, what would you have done if you were in our place? How would you ensure the safety of your country's citizens? What’s your solution?

I'm really interested in knowing what would you have done if you were the decision maker in Israel.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Quote:

Originally Posted by han89
The UN has issued an order of cease of fire, an IMMEDIATE one, but the US f888ked it up and put a vito on it then came back afterwards and ordered a cease of fire. SO why put a vito in the first place? This shows you that the US doesn't care at all about Lebanon.

The UN has also issued an order to disarm Hezbollah and deploy the Lebanese army in southern Lebanon. But obviously, only calls for Israel to back off should be implemented. I mean, it’s not like the Lebanese government has to follow UN resolutions, they can just blame Hezbollah for binding their hands. Convenient, isn't it?

I understand that you want the fire to cease on your side of the border. But the Israeli government’s first responsibility is for the safety of the Israeli citizens, not the Lebanese. If you want peace and security, you have to make sure that no one is attacking us from your side of the border. If not, then don’t blame Israel for trying to ensure its security by itself.

Quote:

Originally Posted by han89
It's not there fault the war had clached.

Oh, so it’s not the Hezbollah’s fault. Well, that’s definitely interesting. Is it not the Hezbollah’s fault that on the morning of the 12th of July 2006 they’ve unprovokedly started shelling Israeli military positions and villages as a diversion attack in order to abduct 2 Israeli soldiers. Enlighten me, how is it not their fault?

Quote:

Originally Posted by han89
They gave israel 3 days of no firing back and offered an exchange for the lebanese who are old prisonners of war in Israel.

When did that happen? Hezbollah has shelled Israeli towns and cities since day one of the war. Not a single day has passed without Katyushas being fired into Israeli territory. They did ask for a cease fire, but that's just impudent of them. If they do want to give something, though, I’d start with the 2 soldiers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by han89
But no, it seems that destroying all the bridges in lebanon seems to be the solution to get the soldiers back. And so i give you a proof that they don't give a shit about their soldiers, the 2 soldiers issue was not brought up in the solution gondaliza rice brought to lebanon.

The bombardment of bridges has some very strategic value, as was stated before. As for the 2 soldiers, the no negotiations policy is not just for their sake, it’s for the sake of every Israeli soldier and citizen that might be the subject of a similar abduction in the future. If the Hezbollah will gain nothing from abducting Israelis, then it won’t be so eager to abduct Israelis in the future.

Quote:

Originally Posted by han89
So you are issueing another lebanese civil war right? Because last time someone asked something similar, we were down into a 15 years civil war.

It’s your choice. But if you do nothing, don’t act all surprised when someone else decides to.

Quote:

Originally Posted by han89
And let me break it to you: Hezbollah is not only a military organisation. They have ministers in the goverment, they have a big part of the lebanese parlement and have 1/4th of the lebanese people with them which is 1 million lebanese citizen with them. So how easy is your solution?

Ignoring the fact that the your statement just re-affirmed my argument that the Lebanese government is very much responsible for the situation. The Lebanese government had 6 years to work a solution to the threat that Hezbollah poses to the stability of the region in whatever means they would have chosen to. They chose to do nothing, so they have only themselves to blame.

Quote:

Originally Posted by han89
When you tell people: you have until 8 pm to leave your cities, and then when they get in their cars and are ready to leave, you bomb their cars. That's collatoral damage right?

When you throw bombs and tear down homes under childrens heads and the paramedics have to search for the remains of the corpses all over the place that's collatoral damage right?

When they throw bombs that are FORBIDDEN internationally and that are making people die in the most horrifying ways and have corpses that are in a shape like never seen before that is collatoral damage right?

Israel is doing more than enough to avoid casualties on the Lebanese side. One might think that it’s the Hezbollah’s job to defend the Lebanese citizens, and not Israels’ (since they are a part of the government). Yet it seems that you’re one step short of praising the Hezbollah’s actions. As though it’s not Hezbollah’s own fault that Lebanese citizens are getting hurt. It’s Hezbollah which kills Lebanese by engaging a war against Israel, not Israel. If we wanted to kill citizens, we wouldn’t have warned them to leave in the first place. We could have just started bombarding with no warning.

Take Bint Jbeil for example. It would have been much more “cost effective” to level the entire town from the air before sending in the ground troops (and by that, saving Israeli soldiers’ lives). But IDF has decided against it, knowing that in many of the buildings in the town, Hezbollah terrorists were waiting for the Israeli forces.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Devo
Let's assume Israel actually destorys Hezbollah, how many new terrorist groups will spring up in the process?

It sure is easy enough to criticize. But when it comes to finding alternative solutions, silence befalls all.

FELIPE NO

Taken from bbc:

Quote:

WEDNESDAY 12 JULY

Hezbollah fighters based in southern Lebanon launch Katyusha rockets across the border with Israel, targeting the town of Shlomi and outposts in the Shebaa Farms area.

In a cross-border raid, guerrillas seize two Israeli soldiers before retreating back into Lebanon, insisting on a prisoner exchange and warning against confrontation. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert describes the capture of the soldiers as "an act of war".

- news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5179434.stm

according to this, Hezbollah has abducted the 2 soldiers from within the Israeli territory. As well as shelled Israel (yes, from day one).

Taken from the cnn’s site (from their time-line of the events):

Quote:

Hezbollah fires a pair of rockets into northern Israel from southern Lebanon, and guerrillas capture two Israeli soldiers during an attack along the Lebanese border between the Israeli towns of Zar'it and Shtula.

- edition.cnn.com/interactive/world/0607/timeline.lebanon.israel/frameset.exclude.html

Taken from Wikipedia:

Quote:

At 9:05 AM local time (06:05 CET), on 12 July 2006, Hezbollah initiated a Katyusha rocket and mortar attack on Israeli military positions and villages of northern Israel as a diversionary tactic, injuring at least 8 Israelis according to some reports, and lightly injuring 5 according to others. Afterwards, a ground contingent of Hezbollah militants attacked two Israeli armored Humvees on a routine patrol along the Israel-Lebanon border near the Israeli village of Zar'it with anti-tank rockets, capturing two Israeli soldiers, and killing eight. According to the Lebanese police force and Hezbollah, the Israeli soldiers were attacked and captured on the Lebanese side of the border on 12 July during a mission to infiltrate the Lebanese town of Ayta al-Sha`b, although remains of the Humvees were found in Israel.
- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Israel-Lebanon_conflict

Nehmi, these are 2 of your sources:

Quote:

The Lebanese Shiite Hezbollah movement announced on Wednesday that its guerrillas have captured two Israeli soldiers in southern Lebanon...

Quote:

The Lebanese Hezbollah movement announced Wednesday the arrest of two Israeli soldiers in southern Lebanon…

The Hezbollah has announced that the Israelis were captured in Lebanon, but that’s not true. The Hezbollah has abducted the soldiers from within Israeli territory. That’s all there is to it.

In response to Casual_Otaku:

What’s happened there is definitely tragic. But these children’s deaths is the Hezbollah’s doing, even if it was caused by Israeli fire. The Hezbollah is risking the Lebanese civilians’ lives by operating from within Lebanese cities, by hiding ammunition inside Lebanese civilian buildings, and by launching rockets from within populated areas.

mms://mz12.mediazone.co.il/mediazone/34/3204!3631.wmv

This film is taken from a recent IDF briefing shown on Israeli television. The video shows the launching of rockets from the area of Kfar Qana. The video continues to show several vehicles that were used to launch rockets entering civilian buildings after launching said rockets.

Oh, and han89, by “real, workable solutions”, I didn’t mean: “just do whatever the Hezbollah wants, and all will be fine.” That’s just dumb.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

This is gonna get a bit long, and I’m sorry for that…

Originally Posted by Onyx

Be consistent. If Israel gave a damn about its citizens, it might realize that going to war over 2 soldiers put its citizens in even more harm for every Lebanese citizen they kill. They are just creating more terrorism.

You can dismiss the Hezbollah attack by saying “they just kidnapped 2 soldiers”, but you’d be missing the point (as well as some facts). Since the withdrawal from Lebanon, every now and then, the Hezbollah decides to abduct a few soldiers (during 2006 and 2000), and even a citizen. From time to time, they test the recent shipment of Katyusha rockets from Syria and Iran, by launching them into Israeli territory. In between, they’re smuggling other weaponry from Iran and Syria, calling for the destruction of the “Zionist enemy”. You know, regular stuff. As han89 has stated, us not retaliating in the past, has only encouraged the Hezbollah to continue (“you’ve done nothing before, why now?”).
It’s true that we negotiated the exchange of prisoners in the past. But it is also true that all of the above has happened even AFTER the withdrawal of the Israeli army from Lebanon to the border approved by the UN. And although, some of you seemingly disagree, it is also (according to, at least, most of the world) true that the attacks by Hezbollah were taking place inside Israeli territory.

Now given those facts, tell me, Onyx, Rock, and whomever else who might want to answer: what is a sovereign state that wants to defend its citizens and even its <gasp> soldiers </gasp> to do? Should we use military power? Even the slightest bit? (it seems that we’re using too much. Maybe if we just fired Katyusha rockets back unto Hezbollah strongholds, it would have been OK? Or maybe we should just wait a bit, until the Hezbollah catches up and kills more Israelis before we’re allowed to carry any military operation?).
Wait a minute, I know. We should negotiate. Stupid us, how did we not think of this earlier. Oh, wait a minute… we did. And shockingly, it resulted in more attacks. And more abductions.

Or maybe we should ask the UN to deploy a peace-keeping force along the border. wait… that sounds a bit familiar too…

Oh, I know. We should ask the UN to pass a resolution, asking the Lebanese government to disarm Hezbollah (or even just take control over it, and add its forces to the Lebanese army’s). What? Resolution 1559?

If only there were as many a solution as complaints…

Quote:

Tony, what I'm trying to say is that you seem to lack the ability to put yourself in the place of the Lebanese people.

And you seem to lack the ability to put yourself in the place of the Israeli people.

Quote:

Also, good luck trying to convince the average Lebanese that Israel destroying the country is in their best interest.

It would have been in the Lebanese best interest to disarm, or gain control over Hezbollah during the last 6 years. But what’s done is done. Israel is not acting in Lebanon’s best interests, it’s acting in its own best interests. And that is, defending the citizens of our country, just as any other sovereign country would have done in our stead.

Quote:

And Hezbollah must do what the people of an invaded nation must do when they are under attack; fight back.

Fight for what? For the defense of the Lebanese people? Nice job, operating from amongst civilians is surely the best way to defend them. Invading into Israel is definitely an act of defense. They wanted peace and quiet so badly, that they have shelled Israel, crossed the border, abducted 2 of its soldiers and killed 3 others.
The Hezbollah has surely done a fantastic job defending the Lebanese citizens. Bravo.

Also, when comparing the IDF and Hezbollah. Note that the IDF doesn’t decide what to do on its own. IDF is following the Israeli government’s decisions, not the other way around.
Hezbollah on the other hand, is acting on its own. Hezbollah decides whether the Lebanese will go into war or not. Hezbollah decides when (and if) to retreat. Hezbollah decides what happens in Lebanon, not the elected prime minister (who surely didn’t want all this to happen). And don’t go telling me that the Hezbollah is expressing the people’s opinions, because (at least) at the beginning of the war, many a Lebanese objected to Hezbollah’s actions. Hezbollah only acts on its own agendas.

Quote:

You just don't get it, do you? I'm telling you, this whole business about "restraint" is garbage. As long as the Israelis are still slaughtering Lebanese 9 to 1, does "restraint" really matter if it's already a massacre to begin with?

Again, what do you expect us to do? Wait for the Hezbollah to catch up? We don’t need to apologize for being stronger. Comparing the death tolls on both sides, as means of deciding who is right and who is wrong is kinda barbaric.

I think former Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has ansewered your claim pretty well on an interview to the BBC:

When the BBC interviewer accused Israel of harming Lebanese civilians, Netanyahu compared the situation to the British Royal Air Force's fight against the Nazis in World War II. He said that when the RAF targeted the Gestapo headquarters in Copenhagen in 1944, they missed and hit a children's hospital, but "that didn't make the British pilots terrorists and it didn't make the Nazis the good guys."
He also noted that during WW2, the British retaliated to the Blitz, by leveling entire German cities.
So before calling Israel a terrorist state, and stating that Israel is using unproportional force, check your facts first. Because your countries would have used the same amount, if not much more, of "unproportional force". In fact, some of them already did. And if it was you being shelled, you would have asked them to, yourselves. Justly, might I had.

This is a link to a different interview of Netanyahu to Sky news, if you’re interested. (I couldn’t find mentions of the BBC interview on the BBC site, if someone finds it, please post it, or let me know).
- news.sky.com/skynews/video/videoplayer/0,,31200-netanyahu_030806_1430,00.html

Quote:

If you think Israel will succeed in wiping out Hezbollah, you're going to be waiting for a long time.

As much as I’d like to think that, I don’t. I don’t think that the Hezbollah will be completely wiped out. But I do know that what we’re doing is much better than doing nothing while our soldiers and citizens are getting abducted, killed, injured and displaced.
Sure, the war has its price. I agree that more people are getting hurt (I’m talking about Israel here) right now, than there would have been during the same period of time if we wouldn’t have acted. But this is the difference between thinking in the short term, and thinking in the long term.
I also agree that because of this war, many Lebanese will develop\deepen their hatred towards Israel. Some of them might even join the Hezbollah. But it is definitely much better, than sitting idly and not doing anything to defend ourselves.
Stating that this war achieves nothing is untrue. The Hezbollah did not expect this kind of retaliation. As han89 has said, they only wanted prisoners exchange (poor them…). And they are sustaining damage. The proof of that is their secrecy about their losses, their lies in the media (“we hit a second Israeli ship”, “we’ll hit Tel-Aviv if IDF strikes in Beirut”, “We meant the center of Beirut, not just the southern part of it”, “The Israelis are targeting civilians while we are targeting military posts”).
The rockets threat will never disappear, but if the Hezbollah will hesitate the next time, then we did our job.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Quote:

I'm well aware that Hezbollah has been abducting and killing Israelis as well. But perhaps if Israel wasn't holding thousands of Lebanese and Palestinians to begin with, Hezbollah would have less of a leg to stand on, as I said before.

So you’re basically justifying the Hezbollah attacks. I know you didn’t literally say that, but you’re more than implying. According to you we should just free all the Lebanese and Palestinians in our prisons. Terrorists, of whom some are openly willing to fight against Israel again.
The fact is that there will always be something. We could release the prisoners, but they will still claim that we haven’t withdrawn from the so called “Shebaa Farms”. Even if we would have withdrawn from the Shebaa Farms, there are still many cities they could claim as their own. There would still be the Palestinians, to fight for, and so on… According to you, even if we release the Lebanese prisoners, there will still be the Palestinian prisoners. Maybe we should just free all of the prisoners, without discriminating them based on origins.
Besides, Israel doesn’t hold thousands of Lebanese, that’s just an exaggeration.

Originally Posted by Adamgian

Israel controls a lot of occupied land however, including the Shebaa Farms, Golan Heights, and East Jerusalem. You want peace, give the Arabs back their land.

That just proves my point. There will always be some other thing to fight about. We might as well just leave Israel altogether.

Quote:

And you can't say anything about Hezbollah without looking at Israel, either. Israel has been infamous for abducting people from along the Lebanese border as well.

Israel doesn’t abduct people randomly. And the fact is that many a suicide attacks were prevented thanks to these arrests. Some by arresting the actual bombers, and some by arresting those who plan and support the attacks.

Quote:

In the words of Amy Goodman, "you don't negotiate with your friends. You negotiate with your enemies." And in negotiating, both sides give up something. In Hezbollah's case, it's the violence and the killing of civilians. In Israel's case, it's the release of Lebanese prisoners and violence. Both sides have committed terrorist acts, therefore, both have something to bring to the table and benefit from. If both sides did their part, and then Hezbollah still decided to attack Israel, then I don't think anyone would hold it against Israel to retaliate with military might.

Go on, negotiate with Iran, negotiate with Al Queda. What do you think they want in order to stop their aggressions? Why didn’t Britain negotiate with Nazi Germany? Sometimes, negotiations just don’t work. We negotiated with the Palestinians, but as soon as we reach a dead end, it’s back to violence all over again.
And on what basis do you state that Israel has committed acts of terrorism. And please give me facts that actually prove this, not just death tolls, and pictures of dead bodies. Because all of this proves nothing.

Quote:

There's a flaw in your argument. Hezbollah doesn't hide amongst its citizens as much as say, the Iraqi insurgents. Hezbollah is a much more visible entity. It's been mentioned in this thread many times that the public doesn't support Hezbollah. Out of the reported 900,000 people that have been displaced in Lebanon, it's the members of Hezbollah who are staying behind. They don't have to do much hiding, although that shouldn't really matter anyway since Israeli is indiscriminately bombing civilian targets anyway. What's worse?

Oh, really? Hezbollah doesn’t hide amongst civilians? If it’s just the members of the Hezbollah who are staying behind, then tell me, how come civilians still die in southern Lebanon? Or are they Hezbollah terrorists? In any case, there’s a flaw in your argument.

Quote:

And in your comment about the IDF taking orders from the military, you've illuminated exactly what the problem with Israel is, as with any regional superpower: it's government. Much like the United States, the orders to kill innocent civilians and bomb civilian infrastructures is coming from the government. Do you see a problem with this? I sure as hell do.

If you honestly believe that the Israeli government is ordering the army to kill innocent civilians, then I sure as hell see the problem here. No matter what I say, no matter what reasoning I give. All you’re gonna say is “Israel is a terrorist state”, “You just want to kill civilians”, etc…

Quote:

Apologize for being "stronger?" No, of course not. Apologize for war crimes? Yes.

proofs, please.

Quote:

And I wasn't comparing death tolls to see who was right or wrong. Good job putting words in my mouth.

Originally Posted by Onyx

You just don't get it, do you? I'm telling you, this whole business about "restraint" is garbage. As long as the Israelis are still slaughtering Lebanese 9 to 1, does "restraint" really matter if it's already a massacre to begin with?

This whole point about restraint is garbage, right? Why? Because there are 9 dead Lebanese for every dead Israeli. It’s a massacre!!!!!1

Quote:

Except there's one big difference. The Germans were invading Britain.

Again, I apologize on behalf of the IDF, for not letting the Hezbollah invade into Israel (though, it does seem that cross border raids no longer count). If the situation does not escalate into a world war, then Israel obviously doesn’t have a right to defend itself. Nor is it entitled to make mistakes.

Quote:

First off, I think you need to check your facts, first. We're not going to get into the argument of "well, you would do it too," because simply, it's utter bullshit. Of course the United States would do the same. And so would Britain, and France. But that doesn't make it right. As a citizen of the United States, I personally did not ask George Bush to go to war after 9/11. So if you are going to profile other governments in the world (and their people), don't assume that they're going to do the right thing, or that their people are going to support them. Because in many cases, you may be wrong.

The world didn’t object as much to the war in Afghanistan… and just to be clear, I didn’t either, I think it was just.

Quote:

I'd like to direct my comments toward the sentences in bold, because they contradict each other. If you claim that Israel is acting in the long term, then how does Hezbollah "hesitating" constitute a long term victory? That's about as short-term as it gets. If that's a long term solution, then Israel will be in Lebanon forever.

Okay, let me rephrase. We do want to disarm Hezbollah. If the world would have realized that, and stopped being so hypocritical about the whole thing, then we probably would have succeeded. In those sentences you chose to ignore, I was stating that Hezbollah does suffer from the attacks, in contrast to its claims. If the world would have put pressure on Iran and Syria to stop their support and arming of Hezbollah, then we would have definitely succeeded. Unfortunately, most of the world chooses to pressure Israel to end this conflict right now, and unconditionally, before the desired goals have been achieved.
Thus, it doesn’t seem that we will be able to disarm Hezbollah in this round. Which is pretty sad, because it probably means that we will have the same debate all over again in a few years time.
Though the fact that the Hezbollah does sustain damage, might prove effective in that the Hezbollah will hesitate to start another conflict against Israel in the future. And if it does, it might be on a smaller scale, than if we did nothing.
On the other hand, if we did nothing. Then the Hezbollah would have attacked again, within a short period of time, and much more fiercely. The world would, of course, have done nothing (except for a condemnation here and there) and if Israel would have continued to not retaliate (as it did the last 6 years), this would have gone on, until something like the current conflict would have eventually happened. Only then, the Hezbollah would have been much more capable, and thus the death toll on both sides would have been much higher. By changing the equation, and making the Hezbollah realize that attacking Israel is only gonna hurt itself, we might be able to buy some time between Hezbollah attacks, in which the world would do something. Also, the world seems to realize the importance of finding a real sustainable solution to this conflict, only when Israel chooses to retaliate (hypocrisy?) and not when Israel is holding back after being attacked.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Quote:

Israel's never going to know what will happen because they've never done it.

Great. Blame Israel for not trying to do things which will obviously not bring the end of this conflict, but will rather, leave us more vulnerable to attacks. Israel has occupied these lands for strategic depth. We are willing to retreat, but if all we’ll get in exchange is terrorists closer to our homes and cities (and by “close”, I mean 5 minutes walks, and even less than that), then it clearly wouldn’t be a wise move to retreat without an agreement.

Quote:

Obviously, you have little understanding of the history of your own country. If the Arabs complain that the house you're living in sits on their land...they're right. Because your country was founded by stealing land from people. So yeah, if you're going to complain about Arabs trying to get their land back, just remember that.

First of all, even if I don’t mention 100 years of history in every post of mine, it doesn’t mean I lack knowledge of it. Though, in this specific case, some would say that you’ve presented a very one sided opinion. But I’d rather not go into this argument here, because clearly, all that your statement is proving, is that no matter what Israel will do, there will always be “one last” other thing we have yet to do.

Quote:

But the number of Palestinians is not an exaggeration. I'll be awaiting your explanation.

So if we just released all of the Lebanese prisoners, it still wouldn’t have pleased the Hezbollah. That’s all I wanted to hear. Or else why would you have brought the subject of the Palestinian prisoners to a discussion about the Israel-Lebanon conflict.
We have arrested many Palestinians, what’s your point?

Quote:

Maybe you should...because it's a human rights violation? And because it's exactly what they did in South Africa? Yes, I think so.

Arresting terrorists is a human rights violation? Also, my point was that no matter what we do, the Hezbollah will never give up fighting us. Some conflicts can’t be ended around the negotiations table. Especially if you’re fighting against a terrorist organization. But, if the Hezbollah will be disarmed, we will definitely be willing to negotiate with the Lebanese government.

Quote:

since your country already "discriminates based on origins,"

I was obviously being sarcastic. Don’t mis-quote me.

Quote:

Again, you have very little understanding of the war that gave birth to your country.

Personal offenses will not help you make your point clear.

Quote:

Britain DID negotiate with Nazi Germany. And part of the reason WW2 started was because Hitler invaded Poland, in staunch violation of the Munich Agreement. The agreement was screwy to begin with, but there were negotiations.

I do know about that, but by arguing about details, you’re missing the main point: some enemies cannot be negotiated with.
If you are displeased with the WW2 example, comment about the 2 other examples: Iran, and maybe even more similar to the situation at hand, Al Queda.

Quote:

And as for examples of Israeli war crimes, did you even read my earlier posts? If you want facts, here are some of many:

1
2
3
An interesting article

“1” – proves nothing.
“2” – proves nothing and is incorrect. The correct number of casualties in Qana according to the Red Cross, and Human Rights Watch is 28. The initial death toll was an "estimation".
Link:hrw.org/english/docs/2006/08/02/lebano13899.htm
Link:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Qana_airstrike

Though, even then, this proves nothing.

“3” – this was dealt with within Israel, without the world’s intervention. Which only proves that Israel is trying to operate under Human Rights Laws.
Also, not only is this report unrelated to the conflict at hand, it’s 4 years old.

“An interesting article” – if a pilot chooses to abort a mission because he fears that civilians may get killed, it only shows that Israelis do care about civilains’ lives.

Quote:

Judged by "results?" Typical of any military, but it sounds to me like results are casualities

That’s just a wild assumption on your part.
And as the article says, it’s not black and white. It’s a war. Mistakes happen. No one in Israel is gaining anything from the deaths of innocent civilians. In fact, the only one who do gain something of it, is Hezbollah.

Quote:

And also refer to these:
[1]Not relating to Lebanon, but still war crimes in the Gaza Strip.
[2]Found from the Human Rights Watch website, despite the link.
[3]Oh boy, you're going to love this report. Be sure to pay attention to the "attacks on civilians" article.

1 – Has any country in the world managed to fight against terror with no civilian casualties? No. It’s not because they don’t want to, it’s because it’s impossible. Terrorists are the ones who choose to hide among civilians. A lot of Palestinian “arch-terrorists” surround themselves with civilians, because it will bring one of 2 consequences:
- 1. Israel might choose to not attack because of the number of expected casualties (and it has happened in the past).
- 2. Israel will decide to attack anyway, thus causing civilian casualties.

Anyway, they win. And that’s only one example. They shoot rockets out of their own cities. They build tunnels that lead to Egypt in order to smuggle weapons. Those tunnels are dug from within civilian buildings, and there are many more examples. You can't really expect a country to give up its right to defend itself just because other civilians may be hit.

2 – there are many evidents that prove that Hezbollah uses civilians as human shields. The fact that most of the ground battles between Israeli soldiers and Hezbollah terrorists are taking place inside cities and towns proves that. Israel is trying to take the battle away from its civilians, Hezbollah is trying to bring the battle close to the Lebanese (and Israeli) civilians. And as Bradylama has mentioned, the survivors of the air strikes don’t always speak the truth.

3 – I didn’t go through the all thing, but:

Quote:

Human Rights Watch found no cases in which Hezbollah deliberately used civilians as shields to protect them from retaliatory IDF attack. Hezbollah occasionally did store weapons in or near civilian homes and fighters placed rocket launchers within populated areas or near U.N. observers…

I think this sums up most of what I think about this human rights report.

Also interesting to note is that:

Quote:

[Human Rights Watch]conducted on-site inspections (when security allowed)

When security allowed…
Is that the same security that influenced Nic Robertson’s report?
Link -newsbusters.org/node/6552
Quote from the article: “This morning, Hezbollah showed journalists around the ruins of its former stronghold, but Hezbollah is also determined that outsiders will only see what it wants them to see.”
Another one:
“In fact, beyond that, it [The Hezbollah] has very, very good control over its areas in the south of Beirut. They deny journalists access into those areas. They can turn on and off access to hospitals in those areas. They have a lot of power and influence. You don't get in there without their permission.”

Quote:

While not the focus of this report, Human Rights Watch has separately and simultaneously documented violations of international humanitarian law by Hezbollah, including a pattern of attacks that amount to war crimes. Between July 12, when Hezbollah captured two Israeli soldiers and killed eight, and July 27, the group launched a reported 1,300 rockets into predominantly civilian areas in Israel, killing 18 civilians and wounding more than 300. Without guidance systems for accurate targeting, the rockets are inherently indiscriminate when directed toward civilian areas, especially cities, and thus are serious violations of the requirement of international humanitarian law that attackers distinguish at all times between combatants and civilians. Some of these rockets, Human Rights Watch found, are packed with thousands of metal ball-bearings, which spray more than 100 meters from the blast and compound the harm to civilians.

Seemingly Hezbollah is not the focus of Human Rights Watch at all. They half mention the Hezbollah’s obvious and undeniable war crimes. And then go into a full in-depth reports about Israel’s so called “war crimes”, which are mainly based on what they hear from the victims themselves, and what they see, often long after the actual incident. There are mistakes made by Israel, sure enough. But from what I’ve seen, you focus on 2 or 3, well covered by the media, obvious mistakes which Israel has apologized for, and then ambiguously explain that there are many other like this (“countless”), but your only proofs are questionable.

Quote:

Israel CAN do something, and it could've for the last 20 years. Give back Lebanese land and release Lebanese prisoners. And then, as I said before, if Hezbollah still decided to attack…

We’ll be in much deeper shit than we already are.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.