Israel invades Lebanon after new capturing of soldiers

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Why does Israel respond so much more viisciously to attacks on its soldiers than it does to attacks on its civilians?

Glad to know our Israeli friends are safe.

I'm not sure.

Possibly, the public effects of kidnappings is far worse than that following a single civilian death.

Also the negociation for getting the kidnapped person back is seen as national humiliation, while a single attack is.. well... a single attack.

[chequita guevara]

You realize that will only encourage more attacks on civilians.

[muxec]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
You realize that will only encourage more attacks on civilians.

When the retaliation is strong enough they have less terrorists that can be encouraged.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Why does Israel respond so much more viisciously to attacks on its soldiers than it does to attacks on its civilians?

Glad to know our Israeli friends are safe.

Because an attack on their soldiers is an attack on their authority. Authority is the most important thing to an oppresor.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Hey Siro - good luck to you and Az (and whatever happened to Eli?, and your families and friends. And to the rest of the IDF.

QFT

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
Israel must react in a way which will make future terrorists think twice.

Yes, that's obviously worked over the past 50 years.

Egypt and Jordan.

[muxec]

Reading lebanesebloggers. It reminds me epidode from "War and Peace" where Russian and French officers met before the better and told one another that this needs to be done.

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
You realize that will only encourage more attacks on civilians.

Discouraging attacks on one target does not equal encouraging attacks on another target.

We have to draw a line sometime.

If we'd respond to an attack in central Israel, would you say it will only encourage attacks near the border?

As I said - the difference is in the type of attack. Killing is considered less severe that kidnapping.

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Keep drinking that Koolade, Siro. Your government benefits greatly from the low level violence. You get to use it as an excuse to continue stealing land and water from your neighbors, and preventing refugees from returning home. You will never have peace as long as you continue acting like bullies.

Opinions aside and facts aside, old chap ;-)

Yes, we're really happy stealing land, water and the non-existing oil, gold and diamonds from the poor lebanese and palestinians!

That perfectly explains why we've pulled out of Gaza (we're after their land and water) and why we're intending to pull out of most west bank territories.

The truth is that we've had nothing to gain from Lebanon expect for a "buffer zone" against PLO and later Hezbullah attacks.

We also have no water to gain from the Palestinian territories since the equifer there, as far as I'm aware, is hardly worth anything, and is getting polluted by the day.


But as I argued on previous threads - before we 'steal' anything from the palestinians, they must prove some sort of posession.

Having had no state, and having rejected all UN resolutions and suggestions for a division of territories between a Jewish state and a Palestinian state in the past - they have no legal basis for owning any land.

The land previously belonged to the Brittish mandate, and later to Jordan. When Israel took over - it belongs to Israel. Now, a large chunk belongs to the Palestinian administration.

Anything beyond that is meaningless demagogy.

[Ming]

Time to start a new one... and remember to STAY CIVIL!