The Middle East spirals out of control!

Originally Posted by YeOldeButchere

but for the time at hand it hasn't even officially been turned in a war, and if it does, it won't last long.

I wouldn't be sure about that; most of the Arab powers have gotten stronger militarily since the last Arab-Israeli war. While this isn't likely to come into play so long as the Israelis stick to beating up on Lebanon and the Palestinians, if they attack Syria, it'd be likely that the Syrians could hold them off, as well as bring Russia into the war on Syria's side.

I am curious why kidnapping Israeli soldiers and holding them hostage has suddenly become popular, though; it doesn't serve any logical purpose and results in sustained Israeli attacks. It certainly doesn't help the Palestinians with their problems.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Russia and Syria (as well as Iran) have developed closer relations in recent years. These have taken the form of arms sales (in the form of new a air defense system, among other things), training, and diplomatic assistance against the United States if need be. The Russian Navy is also reestablishing its Mediterranean Squadron, and reestablishing bases in Syrian ports to support it.

If Russia has been willing to risk angering the United States for years now, as well as Israel, I fail to see why they wouldn't involve themselves if Israel attacks a country that they have considerable interest in defending.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by Soluzar

I'm not sweeping the rest of your points aside, but there's always a moral consideration, even if it's academic given the circumstances.

While moral considerations are nice and everything, just how far do they go? Some people may stand up and tell the government it's wrong, but they're a minority, and the government will do everything it can (which is a great amount) to weaken and neutralize them. Most people lack the will to stand up in the face of that, and will give up their position to get the pressure off their back. Those that don't give in will be of no concern; everyone else either agrees or is keeping quiet, making the government right by default.

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

Originally Posted by CryHavoc

And since Hamas made government it aint unjustifieable to consider their "militia" part of the government's forces.

Yes it is. The Palestinian government and Hamas are seperate entities, and the military wing of Hamas answers to the Hamas leadership, not the Palestinian government. Similarly, Fatah militias answer to the Fatah leadership, not the Palestinian government.

The Israeli Defense Forces, on the other hand, report to the Israeli government, regardless of whether Labor, Likud or Kadima controls it. The Palestinian Authority security forces, which are distinct from militias answer to the Palestinian government, regardless of whether Fatah or Hamas control it.

Quote:

Them making office disvalidates any "terrorist" claims, not by definition.

Sinn Fein had had electoral success for decades. Did that make them stop being a terrorist organization, even while their military wing continued to conduct terrorist actions?

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

Originally Posted by RABicle

I'm not going to bother joining this debate though as Brady, Night Pheonix, Robo Jesus, Lord Styphon and the rest of the nationalist crowd is just running the "what's right for Israel is right for America is right for me" line. There's no point in trying to show these guys an ethical or emotional standpoint on the issue because they all left their integrity along with their moral fibre in the bin before entering.

If you're not going to join in the debate, why bother posting?

Also, could you please remind me where I took the "what's right for Israel is right for American is right for me line", as you put it? Looking over the four posts I made in this thread, I can't find it. I can only assume my eyes are going, and that I'm making posts expressing more support for Israel than I usually show in dicussions about Israel.

You seem to have only posted in this thread to not read what has been said, tell us that you're not going to participate in the debate, and launch unprovoked flames against me and others.

Here, have an official warning.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Originally Posted by Bradylama

You can say that Israel creates a lot of it's own problems, and you'd be absolutely right, but the only organizations with any legitimacy for aggression against Israel are Palestinian. Nations like Syria and Iran have no right to use Palestine as an excuse to further their own regional agendas

I have to disagree with only Palestinian organizations having any legitimacy for aggression against Israel. Syria has its own reasons, since Israel still occupies Syrian territory in the Golan Heights.

Iran presently lacks truly legitimate reasons of its own, though.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Originally Posted by Devo

Despite Israel encroaching on Palestinian land, building walls and forcing long time residents into ghettos?

How does anything that the Israelis do to the Palestinians threaten Iran?

Originally Posted by CryHavoc

Don't consider the Nile to Euphrates thing impossible. You said yourself it would provoke many a party, too many for a clean accomplishment, and here my friend is where Israelis (at least dedicated ones) are very good.

The Israelis can be as good as they want at it, but the task you're saying is possible isn't. They simply don't have the manpower needed (even before the casualties they'd suffer) to take everything from the Nile to the Euphrates without turning it into glass first.

FELIPE NO

Quote:

Nah, not everything needs manpower, Styphon.

Military conquest, especially on the scale you're talking about, requires manpower. Taking all of the land involved would require plenty of numbers, and holding it would require even more. The fact of the matter is, even if the Israelis wanted to take everything from the Nile to the Euphrates, the size of their population means they can't, even if they call up every single reservist and shut down their economy in the process. Period.

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

What I meant was that I disagree with only Palestinian groups having a legitimate reason for attacking Israel. Clearly, they do, and they're not the only ones, since I went into Syria and the reasons it has.

I must have cut it out when rewording the sentence. Whoops.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Miki4

I think that maybe they (the Israel army) should have done this a long time ago

If you're talking about destroying Lebanon, this is actually a repeat performance.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by Rock

That's some nice bombin', Lou.

But seriously, red crosses provide such excellent and convenient aiming points, don't they?

Originally Posted by ofirov

It doesn't mean that we intentionally hit this ambulance and other civilians.

I'm honestly not so sure about that. If this happened once or twice, maybe it could be wracked up to honest mistakes. But that isn't the case, and it keeps happening. Israeli forces have attacked numerous convoys of refugees as they fled southern Lebanon; these convoys existed to be attacked in the first place because the Israelis strongly advised them to leave the area lest they find themselves in the line of fire. Accidents that keep happening generally aren't unless the people having them are really incompetent. Of all the things Israel has been accused of, incompetence has never been one of them.

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.

This calls into question whether Israel considers a stable Lebanon to be in its interests as you have said, ofirov. Israel's current actions, however much damage they do to Hezbollah, ultimately do more to Lebanon. On the other hand, the other option presented would be just as bad for Lebanon; ordering the Lebanese Army to disarm Hezbollah, by force if necessary, would serve to spark a new civil war, with the resulting instability it would bring.

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

Originally Posted by ofirov

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.

So that's why those three civilian refugee convoys were attacked effectively at once; Hezbollah was using them to smuggle terrorists and weapons out of southern Lebanon, using actual refugees as human shields?

Originally Posted by ofirov

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.

I'm further impressed by this statement. Taken in conjunction with the above comments about Lebanese civilians being used as human shields, it effectively serves to make everything in Lebanon a legitimate target, and let Israel say it isn't targeting civilians in the process.

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

Originally Posted by Certa

You mean those refugee convoys that were using the main road to Tyre which which has been under constant bombardment by Israel? That's called walking under the bomb. The roads they were walking on were the targets of the attacks, not the refugees.

And Israel decided to attack them while they were on them? Some people just have the worst sense of timing in the world. And are just dumb; I mean, using a road to drive out of a combat zone? Stupid civilians, they should have gone through the back country. It's all their fault they got killed.

Originally Posted by Cetra

These people have less regard for their own countrymen's lives than then the enemy does. Think about that for a moment.

Looking at it, it would appear that, at best, Israel and Hezbollah have the same regard for the lives of Lebanese civilians; they simply don't care if they get in the way. Hezbollah demonstrates this by hiding among among Lebanese civilians; Israel by attacking those civilians without remorse to kill Hezbollah.

On a different front, should this same disregard for civilian casualties be applied to Iraq? It certainly makes things easier.

Originally Posted by Cetra

It's tragic that civilians are going to die because of the actions but it does not make Israel wrong or immoral because you cannot ignore the intentions of Israel.

If you'll read what I've said, I haven't been ignoring the intentions of Israel. Israel's intentions have been a very important part of what I've been saying. And Israel's intentions appear inconsistent with their actions.

Originally Posted by Cetra

Their intentions are that of protection and survival, not genocide and imperialism.

Of course they are. And if that safety means destroying Lebanon, so be it.

How ya doing, buddy?

Originally Posted by Certa

Israel isn't putting these people in a position of harm, Hezbollah is. Hezbollah is forcing Israels hand in this situation. Shooting the hostage the gun wielding manic is hiding behind while firing at you is not considered murder.

I can't help but notice that this reply doesn't address or refute the charge that I made at all. I said that Hezbollah didn't care about the lives of Lebanese civilians by hiding among them, and that Israel similarly didn't care about the lives of Lebanese civilians by shooting those same civilians to get at Hezbollah.

You essentially confirmed it for me.

Originally Posted by Certa

And yeah it actually is the fault of the civilians

Of course it was. Israel can do no wrong, afterall.

Originally Posted by Certa

As I stated above, targets have been of military value including the refugees that were killed on a main road.

Roads, dairy and tissue paper factories, UN posts...

Again, you've turned to supporting assertions I've made, such as that according to the standards you and ofirov are using, everything in Lebanon is a legitimate target for attack.

Originally Posted by Certa

I'm not trying to say the loss of life is tragic or the destruction of the infrastructure in Lebanon is disturbing

Are you instead trying to say that the loss of life is not tragic, and that the destruction of the infratructure is not disturbing?

Originally Posted by Certa

What else can Israel do to defeat an enemy that is highly integrated in civilian population of Lebanon?

Which requires more questioning of Israel's intent here. It, and you, say that its purpose is to destroy Hezbollah; it's actions suggest it's intent is to destroy Lebanon. Which same you justify, saying that Hezbollah has integrated itself so highly in Lebanon's civilian population. Again, this supports the position that the standards you use make everything in Lebanon legitimate targets for Israeli attack.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Originally Posted by TonyDaTigger

it's not the US's war

We're just the ones who will be paying for it.

FELIPE NO

Originally Posted by Adamgian1

Israel has been brutally slaughtering innocents

No they haven't.

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