two things I just heard about on the radio...

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3278026,00.html


http://newsbusters.org/node/6487


This is why so many people say that the news acts as the Terrorist's mouthpiece...

It was later reported, that Robertson was under threat if he did not do what he did, and he was only allowed to see and say what hizbullah told him he could see and say.

Manind will never stop at war, our blood must flow, and flow it does. Each battle brings another, and each war is merely a conflict, times of peace is the time it takes to prepare for Mankind's next war...


Quoted from somewhere....


yeah, it looks like another war coming up

People don't know what a war looks like anymore, which is a very good thing, but still quite tragic.

It's been said, but I will say it again... I support Isreal.

Two reasons really, out of all of United States allies, Isreal has been the only one to actually act like one. (England doesn't count, they only talk, don't actually do anything.)

Second reason, Isreal has been dealing with BS from every country in the middle east. If I ran succeeds in a nuclear program, who do you think they are going to use it on? During the build up to Desert Storm, what was Hussein's favrite threat, to missle Isreal. In the build up to the current war in Iraq, Hussein threatened to missile Isreal.

Hezballah has attacked Isreal from Lebannon land. Lebannon has done nothing to stop Hazballah. Their complicanty is agreement with the actions of Hezballah. Isreal's response is not only measured and apprirate, it is a lot nicer then need be. Lets look at what happened when Syria got jumpy...

Iran has to know, though, that if they nuke Israel, everyone that matters, on a global scale, is going to be kicking their ass for years to come. Anyone who shows themselves willing to actually use nuclear weapons is suicidal. Having them gives you leverage; using them takes that all away and forces people to deal with you as swiftly and cripplingly as possible. Terrorist groups might use them, if they get them, but you can't honestly think a nation is going to do more than flaunt them. Although North Korea seems crazy for attention, regardless of it's good or bad. They're scary.

How is Israel being a lot nicer than need be? Should they just start shooting anything that moves? They've gone to war, how much less nice can you get? There's not really a line between "At war, but nice," and "At war, but not nice."

Last time Isreal was at war the amount of land the country had more the trippled. In this case, they are not invading Lebannon to make it part of Isreal, they are attempted to disarm Hezballah, since the Lebenese government wont.

I am breaking my own rules, answering here, so please, in advance, if you want to argue with me, hear my side in depth, or anything of the like, please PM me, perferably with a nickname or number of a place where we can speak more comfortably.

Sylphas -
There are vast differences between various kinds of confrontations and wars. The US and the Soviet union were at war, of some king, from about 1945 to about 1990. So, was this the same thing? It wasn't, of course. Wars, confronations and operations come in various kinds, shapes and sizes.

Nementh -
Just a small history correction, though I may be correcting something you know, so forgive me if so -
The war you refer to is the Six day war, of 1967. Not the last war we had, since then we had Yom Kippur, in 1973, Peace of Galilee, in 1982, and various other, smaller-scale, confrontations, though most people don't count them as war.

People who are dying really don't give a damn if you're going to attack them and then go home, or attack them and stay. You could even argue that occupying the country would be nicer, if you figure that Israel would rule better.

Ok... so it is ok for Hezballah to continue fighting... even though Isreali's die... but because in the process of Isreali DEFENDING itself people die.. it is not ok?

Lets remember who shot first here...

I'm not saying a damn thing about right or wrong. I'm just saying that they're not being nice. You can be perfectly right, but if you're bombing someone, that's not nice, even if the other options are worse. "Not worst" is not in any way equal to "not bad."

What does "nice" have to do with anything?

Your talking about Hezbullah, who hijacked thier own country, who calls himself the true leader of Lebanon, who target civilians more than anything else, who put up roadblocks to prevent lebonese from leaving southern Lebenon, who use women and children as Human shields, who use the UN as human shields, and then you talk about Israel not being nice?

This is what I was responding to. Whether they are right or wrong, they sure as hell aren't nice. War is never nice. Sometimes you have to do not nice things. So be it. But don't try to hide that you're killing people, many of them not combatants, just so you feel better about yourself. If you have to do it, do it, but don't try to excuse it with "well, we could be doing worse." The US could start nuking the hell out of everyone, does that make everythiing we do "a lot nicer than need be?"

They may not be "nice" but they are most definitly "nicER"

Many are arguing that Israel would be completing thier mission much faster if they didn't spend so much time throwing down leaflets telling people to leave the area before they attacked, and if instead of fighting house to house, they destroyed all the houses before they sent men in to clean up.

If you compare what Israel is doing, to say Dresden, or the fire bombing of Tokyo, or the bombing of Serbia, it is definitly nicER


The only "innocent" civilians that are in southern Lebanon right now are people who Hezbulah has managed to detain there. Everyone else is either out, or supporters of Hezbulah and therefore not really "innocent."

Define "support". If I say "Yes, I agree with Hezbollah" but do nothing to help supply them or help them beyond that, I am still innocent, at least in as much as that I don't deserve to be shot and killed. I'm sure there's not many of them around, but when you start quoting "innocent" it makes me wary of what you really mean by that.

Support, means that they lobby thier congresman to say that they would be outraged if the Lebonese army dismantled the military wing of Hezbulah, and therefore did not allow Lebanon to complete UN 1559, and thus lead to this situation in the first place.

It was the Lebonese government's fear that if they dismantled Hezbulah the people would "revolt" against them, and there would be civil war (even though there are only about 5,000 Hezbulah militants) If there was no people to revolt against that, then the Lebonese government would have been able to get rid of the Terrorist organization, and there would be no fighting. They also would have been able to sign a peace treaty with Israel, since technically they have been at war with Israel since 1948. Similiar to how North Korea is still at war with South Korea.

The problem I see Israel having at the moment is that they are fighting a war on two fronts. Now this wasn't the plan at first, since most people know that you never fight a two-fronted war. But since Hezbollah went and made it a two-fronted war, it puts Israel in a bind. If you commit all your troops to one side of it you will have alot more firepower to defeat that side. If they do that though, the side left unattended will slowly be advancing to flank them in the rear. I think they are going to need some help. Anyways that is my two cents in the matter.

Actually, now my information may be off, but Palestine is 'backing off' right now because Hezbulleh had targeted them too. (Palastine and Hazbullah are two different Muslim factions.) But this information could be off.

I've seen reports that Israel is actually fighting on 4 fronts.

1. Hezbulah

2. Gaza

3. Suicide bombers and the like are trying to use boats and comming in from the ocean.

4. The Media.

Please don't put bad press in the same list as suicide bombers.

What is the difference between the person who shoots you and the person who convinces the person to shoot you exactly?