Israel launches raids on Lebanon

[Quest]

i was watching the news and it dawned on me that the international community's response is somewhat mute. israel is the aggressor in this current serious conflict. the war machine is moving and killing civilians and yet for the international community it is business as usual.

if the roles were reversed and lebanon or palestine was the war machine marching into israel, i bet G8, UN, EU, US and whatnot would be jumping in to end the conflict.

the reason i see why israel can do what it can and get away with it, is that lebanon, palestine, etc have nothing to offer the international community. whereas israel has the financial, industrial, military links to the rest of the world.

[psi29a]

Just to put this out there, but from conversations I've had it has come down to these lines: if you are not willing to support Isreal, then you are anti-semetic and should be ashamed of yourself. Shame is a very powerful motivator.

For a better take on the events as far as the USA is concerned can be found here on newsvine, written by our very own Killfile:

Catch-22: Israel and Bush's Choice for Peace or War

Responses and/or opinions are always welcome.

[Quest]

you mean not willing to support israel.

[psi29a]

you mean not willing to support israel.

Pardon, you are correct. It comes down to if you are _NOT_ willing to support Isreal, then you are anti-semetic. That is the popular belief, it is stronly rooted in shame. Europe and North America share the same common shame that has enabled Isreal. That is from my point of view.

I'm not a supporter of Zionism, but I'm affraid that because of this that I've ruined or at best strained my relationship with many people including the best-man at my own wedding. This is a very devisive issue.

Please read the article above.

[Shaka Zulu]

Thats the good ol' fucking same award winning sad childish counter-argument Izraeli/Jews and its supporters has used for dozens of decades now, its quite absurdly funny that some people actually take it seriously or buy it, a fine showing of good PR machine behind the state of Izrael.

One dissaproves of Izrael politically, if some retards want to bring in the etnicity of the warmongering state terrorism that is Izrael fond of, then they are just showing that they have zero apologetic argument for Izraels despicable actions. You cant and should not discuss anything with someone cant get pass this childish barrier of automatically calling someone anti-semitic because one dissaproves of a State killing civilians daily, or invading a country(for the second time in 20 or so years, mind you). I wouldnt like to have friends like that if I were you, no matter how touchy it is for them personally(I can normally discuss this with Jewish classmates who CAN distinguish disagreeing with the actions of a state from being anti-semitic).

[Brainpiercing]

It's not a matter of shame I think. The only absolute position I adhere to is that Israel must survive. Perhaps this is different for other people.

And internationally, the only people who are not condemning Israel are the governments. You don't see too much press condoning the Isreali military actions, although there are some. There are also those who say that Israel only has the choice between wrong and bad, but a choice they must make nevertheless.

IMHO only those people that want to destroy Israel completely are antisemites. You have the freedom to value the lives civilians higher than Israel's self-defence, this does not make anyone an antisemite. Unfortunately this topic is a very emotional one for many people, and very uncivilised (and violent) opinions easily surface. People should think carefully about what their opinions actually mean. People honestly hoping that Israel will vanish in the future want nothing less than another genocide, that should be clear. Because if that happens the chances of Israelis surviving in the middle east without their state are near 0.

I don't have an answer to the civilian deaths occuring on either side. The only answer I can attempt is that Israel is carelessly killing civilians, while Hisbollah/Hamas/Al-Aksa brigades etc. are purposely killing civilians. Does it make a difference? Well, maybe. There is a legal difference between the two, which is that of manslaughter and murder. Of course the result is the same.
However, if anyone is prepared to accept civilian deaths in the defence of your own country, you cannot really criticise the Israeli excess of force.

[psi29a]

This my persepective, not 'fact' or 'scholarly'.

What about the jewish population living in Iran right now? I have no first hand knowledge, however they seem to be peacefully co-existing with everyone there.

It is Isreal itself that is the problem, not the jewish people or muslem.

Zionism does not equal Judaism.

Zionism is a political movement and ideology that supports a homeland for the Jewish people in the Land of Israel, where the Jewish nation originated over 3,200 years ago and where Jewish kingdoms and self-governing states have existed up to the 2nd century. While Zionism is based in part upon religious tradition linking the Jewish people to the Land of Israel, the modern movement was originally secular, beginning largely as a response to rampant antisemitism in Europe and many parts of the Muslim world during the 19th Century. After a number of advances and setbacks, and after the Holocaust had destroyed much of the existing Jewish society in Europe, the Zionist movement culminated in the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948.

... and ...

Judaism is the religion of the Jewish people with around 15 million followers as of 2006[1]. It is one of the first recorded monotheistic faiths and one of the oldest religious traditions still practiced today. The values and history of the Jewish people are a major part of the foundation of other Abrahamic religions such as Christianity, Islam, as well as Samaritanism and the Bahá'í Faith

Why must we have an Isrealie state?

Why did UN create the state while taking the land away from the indigenous population even while under British protectorate?

Finally: Why didn't the UN make Isreal out of Bovaria?

--

Look at it another way: Palastine is a parasite living of Isreal. Isreal is a parasite living off the UN and specifically the United States. This may sting someone, however these are governments and organizations that have ties to Religion but isn't a Religion themselves. If Isreal stop getting aide from other nations, it will fail. Palastine in turn would will also fail, you will then see more civilian casualities and starvation of all people.

[MrFelony]

from what i've read for my history classes, Islamic countries have always made a point of religious freedom because one of the beliefs of Islam is that one cannot be forced to a religion. It has been a while since the era i studied but i should hope that it still follows something similar

[Buzkashi]

Not all Non-Muslims were allowed to practice their religion freely. I'm pretty sure it was just people of the book. Being Muslims, Jews, and Christains. Idol worshipers were not permitted no matter what. Also Non-Muslim had to pay a special tax called the Jizyah Tax to the Muslim rulers to insure their saftey.

In states ruled by Islamic law, jizya or jizyah (Arabic: جزْية) is a per capita tax imposed on non-Muslim adult males, known as dhimmis.

[Brainpiercing]

Well, amazingly enough, in some muslim countries people are still being stoned for losing their faith.

This is one of the reasons why I am very reserved against all muslim states. Also, most muslim states are clearly not secular. There is really only turkey, and even there there are great disparities between different parts of the population, and there are concurrent forces of almost radical secularism and radical islamic tendencies running against it.

Edit: Correction: There are a few other nominally secular Islamic countries. Pakistan comes to mind.

[Linafae]

Can you show me where in the Quran or in what Haddith it says that in? I mean I havent finished the whole Quran yet( I'm getting close) but I've yet to come upon that.

Sorry the late, I don't usually enter too much in this forum

I don't know where it's written. Maybe it isn't, but that's supposed to be one of the "rewards" for being a suicide in the Yihad. If it's true, false, or an invention of the leaders of Al'Quaeda, Hamas, etc., I couldn't say

[Brainpiercing]

It's an invention of the great ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and his Basidj brigades. Before him, there was no suicide terrorism in the islamic world. The Basidj started the trend of sending children to their death in the minefields (and nearly unequipped soldiers to their death against the Iraqi army) with the promise of eternal life in paradise.

The children were sent to the minefields with a little key around their necks (manufactured cheaply in China) which should open them the gates to paradise. Parents gladly sent their sons and daughters to their deaths if they could not support them.

This also started the trend of seeing life in the real world as a passing stage, full of sin, which had best be be left behind quickly in a glorious sacrifice.

I won't even begin to dwell on the hyprocricy of the iranian spiritual leaders at that time.

[Shaka Zulu]

There's something fantastically sickening and disgusting with involving their children in this manner...

Izraeli children sending peaceful and greeting postcards to Libanese kids:









The link, warning very disturbing pics inside: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php? ... cleId=2754

[Sortep]

Yeah those poor israelis getting picked on by those big bad lebanese terrorists.... fucking fox news... shaka.. thanks for the find... hopefully at least one person's eyes open

No need to quote the post above you, we all can scroll just fine.

[panasonic]

so how bout them peaceful israelis....

[Shaka Zulu]

Yeah those poor israelis getting picked on by those big bad lebanese terrorists.... fucking fox news... shaka.. thanks for the find... hopefully at least one person's eyes open

No need to quote the post above you, we all can scroll just fine.

And regarding Izraels relation to terrorist groups(Though Hezbollah isnt a terrorist group, dislike them whatever you like, they are an armed militant group formed after what Izrael did to Libanon in the 80's. No EU country is willing to put them in terrorist lists), check out this utterly disgusting hypocracy, this is something I wrote in another site:

"Israelis' including former prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu are celebrating the bombing of the King David Hotel in 1946, which killed over 90 and helped end the UN mandate of the UK in the then Palestine.

Despite British protests at this, he calls it an act of liberation, but is anyone not thinking that at the time when there is talk of the terroisim of Hezbollah and Hamas that this is incredibly hypocritical and a bit silly when they are looking for allies at this time. And this from someone who thought that they are justified in going after Hezbollah."

Many old Izraeli high officials(other then former PM's like Netanyahu and Sharon) have a past with these terrorist groups, killing many British(and Palestinians) civilians. And now they are celebrating their slaughtering terrorist acts as its like a fucking liberation, and they dare to judge any so called terrorists today? Even worse, whats the relatives to those killed British civilians going to feel when hearing this? The deaths of your relatives being celebrated. I'm sure as hell they wouldnt want anyone celebrating the holocaust or any terrorist acts Hamas and other groups has made.

[Sortep]

my lebanese friend xani just got off the phone with me... he was telling me all kinds of shit and i'm just really annoyed at my government right now... how can we sanction this crap? is our media really that deeply degraded? we need some muckracking journalist to sacrifice his/her career so at least someone's eyes can be opened... but what do i know

[Brainpiercing]

As of recently I can't help but take a diversified stance on this conflict. My main point still remains, Israel had to act, and still needs to act. However, recently their strategy has become more and more excessive. Furthermore, there does not seem to be a concise line they follow. Bombing the Lebanese military is counterproductive even to their own goals. The amount of destruction in parts of Lebanon almost remind me of the carpet bombing of the second world war.

Do I find the pictures of Israeli children writing messages on artillery shells sick? YES, definitely. However, the page they were quoted from is grossly propagandistic. Those images of dead children have been torn entirely out of context. No information as to the location or the source has been given. Those children could just as easily have died in Iraq. The creator of the page wanted to make his agenda clear, and what better way to cause an outcry of righteous anger than by showing dead children? There were dead children on either side, let's not forget that. Hisbollah has never even tried to hit anything but civilians with their missiles.

The question that remains is, however, what to do against an enemy like the Hisbollah? If they have missiles with ranges exceeding a few hundred kilometers (thanks to Iran, the factual real agressor here), it won't even help to bulldoze a security corridor between Israel and Lebanon. If the UN could finally get their ass in gear and put peacekeepers in Lebanon and Gaza, with an actual FIGHTING mission, instead of just a watching mission, maybe we could come to a conclusion. That would also help to reveal who is the real agressor in this conflict - the one who would go on fighting in such an even.

[Shaka Zulu]

Yes, whats important here is wether or not those dead childred are Libanese, not wether or not Izrael has so far killed many many children like those, and almost 400 people in total.


And if you happen to doubt the so called propoganda(yeah they need pics of dead iraqi's, its not like Izrael isnt slaughtering enough Libanese people), then I¨m looking forward to you doubting wether or not this link is also of Libanon or Iraq(And as you said, they are targetting entire Libanon, not only Hezbollah), I warn you very very very strongly though, this is an immensely strong and gruesome pics, which I wished someone didnt show me(only saw first 2-3 pics before I quickly closed it)...:

http://fromisraeltolebanon.info/

[Brainpiercing]

I've looked at those images. The chemical weapons allegations are wrong, other than that they are pretty horrible, but no worse than what can be seen in any war. I have no doubts you can get those kind of pictures from Israel as well.

However, several points are to be expected: Of course the IDF will shoot at trucks and pickup trucks, because rockets are often launched from those. There are numerous examples of this. If the Hisbollah didn't use civilian vehicles to launch their missiles from, the IDF wouldn't need to target them. Likewise with buildings hit.

And if the Israeli strikes make people fear them, well, they have fulfilled their goal. That can be the only reason for attacking like that. If every time a rockets hits Israel half a country is bombed to bits, then they hope people will stop doing it.
I still believe you need to look at who the agressor is. While the radical Palestinians at least have a mediocre justification for their actions, the Lebanese Hisbollah have NONE. Lebanon has been independant and not occupied for a while now. Yet they still attacked Israel (at a time that very conveniently distracts from the Iranian atomic weapons talks).

To me the Lebanese people are the victims of the Hisbollah agressors just as much as of the Israeli airstrikes.

[Shaka Zulu]

Your hypocracy is quite sickening(yes ofcourse its reasonable to target REFEGUEE CARAVANS in Gaza, where Hezbollah isnt even involved there).

I'm not even defending Hezbollah(even though, for every 1 Izraeli civilian they kill, Izrael kills 15) and detest them as much as Izrael(before Izraels current actions), but its so sad to see how apologetic you are of their unportotionell attacks and slaughter of over 400 civilians(Gaza included), where they are targetting ONLY civilians now, with illegal weapons such as cluster bombs. I wont try to adress you anymore, because I want to avoid reading your sad bullshit again(You are fucking rationalising direct and deliberate attacks at civilians, and saying its understandable).

[psi29a]

Hezbollah is an interesting creature in that they play two rolls very well. First roll is as an Resistance Army the second roll is Political Party. When they are not fighting Isreal, they are building/funding schools, hospitials, and other socially minded things.

Back when Isreal was still in occupation of Southern Lebenan, they did both and the Lebenize loved them for it. When Isreal left Lebanan, Hezbollah found themselves in a hard position because according to the peace agreements in 2000, it was required that all militias had to disarm. Hezbollah didn't, but their roll as resistance fighters waned in the public eye. They spent more time doing public service projects.

Because they didn't disarm in 2000, they where classified as Terrorists.

Had they disarmed and became just a political party this entire situtation wouldn't exist.

(warning: this is from what I heard on NPR, i may be mistaken)

[Shaka Zulu]

Thats basically the 101 on Hezbollah yes(though it should be mentionned the country is quite split in the middle concerning them, and dont want to start a civil war in trying to disarm them, just after they got independence from Syria).

But not too many classify them as terrorrists(for the reasons you stated), besides the minor terrorist acts, which many Western countries and other influential UN members dont see as enough reason to lable them as terrorists(Its not terrorism to flat out attack your enemy and such).

[Tempest]

But not too many classify them as terrorrists(for the reasons you stated), besides the minor terrorist acts, which many Western countries and other influential UN members dont see as enough reason to lable them as terrorists(Its not terrorism to flat out attack your enemy and such).

I don't think any terrorist act can be described as minor. It's kind of an oxymoron.

Hezbollah is believed by the United States and some other countries' intelligence agencies to have kidnapped and tortured to death U.S. Marine Colonel William R. Higgins and the CIA Station Chief in Beirut, William Francis Buckley without incontrovertible evidence, and to have kidnapped around 30 other Westerners between 1982 and 1992, including U.S. journalist Terry Anderson, British journalist John McCarthy, the Archbishop of Canterbury's special envoy Terry Waite and Irish citizen Brian Keenan. Hezbollah was accused by the US government of being responsible for the April 1983 bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Beirut that killed 63; of being behind the 1983 Beirut barracks bombing, a suicide truck bombing that killed 241 U.S. Marines in their barracks in Beirut in October 1983; of bombing the replacement U.S. Embassy in East Beirut on September 20, 1984, killing 20 Lebanese and two U.S. soldiers; and of carrying out the 1985 hijacking of TWA Flight 847 en route from Athens to Rome.

It is claimed that Hezbollah had a hand in the terrorist attacks in Argentina in 1990 and 1994: the Israeli Embassy Attack in Buenos Aires and the AMIA Bombing, respectively. Hezbollah denies these claims.

Hezbollah has denounced some acts of terror, such as the September 11 attacks, GIA massacres in Algeria, Armed Islamic Group attacks on tourists in Egypt, and the murder of Nick Berg. However, it expresses support and sympathy for the activities of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, Islamist groups responsible for suicide attacks and armed resistance in Israel and the Palestinian territories.

[42ndEndOfTheWorld]

My opinion about this whole thing is best summed up in this article. Everybody should really read it if we want better future for ourselves. Many important things are nicely summed up. Time to stand up:

http://www.simonyi.ox.ac.uk/dawkins/Wor ... d_up.shtml

How can I say that religion is to blame? Do I really imagine that, when a terrorist kills, he is motivated by a theological disagreement with his victim? Do I really think the Northern Ireland pub bomber says to himself, “Take that, Tridentine Transubstantiationist bastards!” Of course I don’t think anything of the kind. Theology is the last thing on the minds of such people. They are not killing because of religion itself, but because of political grievances, often justified. They are killing because the other lot killed their fathers. Or because the other lot drove their great- grandfathers off their land. Or because the other lot oppressed our lot economically for centuries.

My point is not that religion itself is the motivation for wars, murders and terrorist attacks, but that religion is the principal label, and the most dangerous one, by which a ‘they’ as opposed to a ‘we’ can be identified at all. I am not even claiming that religion is the only label by which we identify the victims of our prejudice. There’s also skin colour, language, and social class. But often, as in Northern Ireland, these don’t apply and religion is the only divisive label around. Even when it is not alone, religion is nearly always an incendiary ingredient in the mix as well. [...]

It is not an exaggeration to say that religion is the most inflammatory enemy-labelling device in history. Who killed your father? Not the individuals you are about to kill in ‘revenge’. The culprits themselves have vanished over the border. The people who stole your great-grandfather’s land have died of old age. You aim your vendetta at those who belong to the same religion as the original perpetrators. It wasn’t Seamus who killed your brother, but it was Catholics, so Seamus deserves to die ‘in return’. Next, it was Protestants who killed Seamus so let’s go out and kill some Protestants ‘in revenge’. It was Muslims who destroyed the World Trade Center so let’s set upon the turbaned driver of a London taxi and leave him paralysed from the neck down.

The bitter hatreds that now poison Middle Eastern politics are rooted in the real or perceived wrong of the setting up of a Jewish State in an Islamic region. In view of all that the Jews had been through, it must have seemed a fair and humane solution. Probably deep familiarity with the Old Testament had given the European and American decision-makers some sort of idea that this really was the “historic homeland” of the Jews (though the horrific stories of how Joshua and others conquered their Lebensraum might have made them wonder). Even if it wasn’t justifiable at the time, no doubt a good case can be made that, since Israel exists now, to try to reverse the status quo would be a worse wrong.

I do not intend to get into that argument. But if it had not been for religion, the very concept of a Jewish State would have had no meaning in the first place. Nor would the very concept of Islamic lands, as something to be invaded and desecrated. [...]

It is a spade we have here, let’s call it a spade. The Emperor has no clothes. It is time to stop the mealy-mouthed euphemisms: ‘Nationalists’, ‘Loyalists’, ‘Communities’, ‘Ethnic Groups’, ‘Cultures’. ‘Civilisations’. Religions is the word you need. Religion is the word you are struggling hypocritically to avoid.