Middle East thread continued

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by GePap

Yeah, the Israelis always know the political ramifications of their military actions. I mean, just look at 1982.....

Didn't say they were flawless - just stated that they are quite aware that their operations may have ramifications.

The political part is the reason for the Lebanse govenrment not being able to tackle Hizbullah. If the Lebanese government were seen as the legitimate government of all Lebanese, then the Shia in the south would not stand in a governments attempt to control the whole of its territory. But the Beirut governemt had little legitimacy amongst the Shia, so it can;t move against Hizbullah unless it can convince the Shia that their interests lie with the government as opposed to Hizbullah.

Thank you for confirming my POW - that is, while hizbollah controls the south, then the regular lebanese government can't control it.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by GePap


Israel has given reasons for all its attacks. The stated reason for attacking the airport, as well as roads, and bridges has been to stop supplies reaching Hizbullah. The reasons given for attacking the ports in the north was to disable rada installations that were "targeting" Israeli warships.

And that is legitimate when the shooting starts.

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by notyoueither


And that is legitimate when the shooting starts.

I did actually consider that as an acceptance from GePap on the legality of the Israeli actions

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by Colon�
Ok, that all sounds fair enough, one may want to quibble that Hamas wasn't acting as gov't in the kidnappings, but everything is a bit fuzzy in the Palestinian territories so I can't blame you for taking that view.

Whether or not acting as gov't in said event is irrelevant. They are a government now, and anything they do is.

How can they be both a government and non-government? That is ignoring responsability. They can't have both ends of the stick.

Besides it is irrelevant since newspapers reported that several high ranking Hamas ministers had knowledge of the action.

And Hamas' leadership abroad most certainly knew of the action. So it was known to the higher echelons of the organization that has 70% of seats in the parliament.

However I don't understand how bombing civilian Lebanese infrastructure (bridges, highway, airport runway...) fits in the story of destroying Hizbullah's installations. Even Der Spiegel states that the IDF bombed the fuel tanks of a power plant and that most deads are civilians.

First - infrastructure is used by Hezbullah. Hitting infrastructure possibly used by the enemy to resupply or move around its weapons and people is a legitimate part of war.

Some elements were also bombed as a message to the lebanese government. Be they involved or not - they should start budging.


As far as civilian deaths - that naturally occurs when you hit military targets hidden inside poplation centers. Notice Israel has always dropped warning leaflets prior to striking civilian areas.

I would say that compared to the sheer numbeer of targets hit (in the hundreds) the number of civilian casualties is extremely small. Also you don't have any statistics as to who of said civilians are actually Hezbullah members.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by BlackCat
That is an absurd statement - why would that make them de-fact gov ?

'Cause the airport is run by the Lebanese government in its operations and security.

[Edan]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


'Cause the airport is run by the Lebanese government in its operations and security.

Not very well if Hezbollah can get weapons through it.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


'Cause the airport is run by the Lebanese government in its operations and security.

It is also the place where 747's full of weapons from Iran come into Lebanon.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I wonder... plenty of weapons came from New England ports to the IRA, through Irish ports. Would the UK be justified in obliterating the Port Authority of NY & NJ or Ports in Ireland as a result of an attack on the IRA?

[Winston]

It is also the place where 747's full of weapons from Iran come into Lebanon.

But how else are they supposed to have a chance of killing any Israelis? Be fair..

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by notyoueither
It is also the place where 747's full of weapons from Iran come into Lebanon.

If this is really true, I don't see how anyone can argue that the bombing was unjustified.

[General Ludd]

Why are weapons from iran to lebanon evil and sinister while weapons from, say, the USA to Israel just peachy?


It's pretty rich to see americans talking about the evils of arms trading when the USA is by far the largest producer and exporter of weapons in the world. Guns are only ok if they're on our side... and never mind that we make the guns for both sides anyways.

[Winston]

Best. Post. Ever.

[notyoueither]

Depriving your enemy of supplies tends to be something you do in a war, if you can.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Depriving your enemy of supplies tends to be something you do in a war, if you can.

So let's blow up the factories in north america and europe that's making them all.

[notyoueither]

Fine plan. You get right on it.