The Middle East Continues...

[dannubis]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
And how are their (the 1.4 million Lebanese Shiites) interests served by unprovoked aggression against a neighbor?

UNPROVOKED aggression ?



you are funny

[notyoueither]

How exactly was Israel provoking them, dannubis?

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by MOBIUS


Actually I am indebted to you for destroying Adam Smith's attempts to discredit the article by lending the credence of The Times (that well-known Rupert Murdoch paper) to my post, by finding the original story...

You see, being pushed for time I merely picked the first article I googled, checked it was basically correct and posted it. Call me lazy, but in a very satisfying way as nye leaps to my defence...! Mea Culpa

Also and quite sad really is that it appears you haven't entirely grasped what it is you are quoting...



Man, you truly have shot yourself in the foot on this one! And holed AS' argument into the bargain!

All you've done is quote the two Israeli plaques, however you never mentioned to quote the current ambassador's claim that there was no warning, or that he branded them terrorists - or the fact that The Times branded Irgun terrorists...

I bet you just expected (rightly I expect, with this shower... ) everyone to be too gullible to actually click on your link and find the truth!

Israel: Guilty of attempting to rewrite history thereby justifying its terrorist roots.

Nice one NYE!!!

You really don't know when to cut your losses, do you?

BTW, I posted the contents of the plaques. The rest of it was in the first part of the article that you linked from some whack-job, right-wing site that makes the BNP look like reasonable people, and who did not carry that part.

And here you are crying innocence and 'lack of time'.

How do you explain the second part of AS's criticism? I'll bet it is that anti-Semites can be right twice a day, like broken clocks, or maybe they are right 24 hours a day in Mobystan.

[Ecthy]

N-Y-E! N-Y-E!

[Flip McWho]

Not really. That has less to do with morality than with the wildly inaccurate missiles Hzb is using compared to Israel's state-of-the-art weaponry...

Though now it's interesting that the one with the state of the art weaponry is killing the most innocent.

How exactly was Israel provoking them, dannubis?

Now thats fairly obvious nye, by existing of course

And how are their (the 1.4 million Lebanese Shiites) interests served by unprovoked aggression against a neighbor?

They're not, but how are american interests served by Iraq? There's always other interests besides the peoples that organisations consider. It doesn't stop the fact that Hizbullah have helped their people though.



Also the democracy in Lebanon was only in its infantile stages. Expecting it to get a grip on a significant militia that also had the support of the people within it's region of influence within a very short time period is very unrealistic. Israel woulda been better served if they'd have helped to prop up the Lebanon government, army and economy aiding the recovery of that state and letting it exert more influence in the Hizbullah controlled south. Instead, Israel has pretty effectively turned most of Lebanon against Israel with surrounding Islamic areas also getting disgruntled.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by GePap

They bought into the myth of air power, and they were loath to have to re-occupy Southern Lebanon, which would have been the result of any massive ground campaign.

Air power serves the same role in modern armies as light (aka missle) cavalry served in ancient armies. It is excellent at scouting and attacking enemy communications and supply lines, excellent at pursuing and destroying retreating forces, excellent at screening friendly forces, good at supporting other combat arms and weak when it tries to directly assault or hold terrain, particularly urban or mountain terrain or fortifications. The Israeli Air Force is isolating southern Lebanon from its supply sources while causing some level of attrition to Hezb. forces, which fits its role well, but heavy infantry is going to be necessary for anything more than a siege.

The reason that we aren't seeng a blitzkrieg in southern Lebanon like that in 1982 is that Hezb. has prepared for over a decade for just such a move with extensive fortifications and numerous kill zones in depth, as well as hidden forces which hope to attack the weak logistical tail of a fast-moving armored juggernaut. Israel is therefore isolating areas and trying to clean them out as thoroughly as possible before they push any further into Lebanon. Perhaps they hope that a political solution (along the lines of the seemingly doomed U.S.-French proposal) will obviate the need for a deeper incursion, but they are laying the groundwork for it in case they have to go forward.

I also agree with Chegitz that the Israelis are trying their best to depopulate southern Lebanon to reduce the number of skirts and cribs that Hezb. can hide behind. This will also give lie to the Hezb. claim that they are "protecting" Lebanon from Israel rather than starting a war in order to enhance their domestic position in Lebanon and/or serving as a smokescreen for Iran and a foil for Syria.

[dannubis]

Originally posted by notyoueither
How exactly was Israel provoking them, dannubis?

Maybe not in your eyes, but you have to admit that after an occupation that lasted 18 years "unprovoked" is an... unwisely chosen word

[BeBMan]

No it isn't. They either did a provocation in this case or not. If occupation would play a role in this concrete case, why does the Hzb not fire some barrages at Syria too? Just for the sake of balance.....

[atawa]

Originally posted by Geronimo


For the past few decades any non imprisoned Hamas members have enjoyed total access to the only jewish temple site of any true significance at all while for whatever reason non muslim Israelis have not been extended that same freedom.

I doubt any Hamas member from Gaza can just get into his car and drive to temple mount for a visit

Anyway, what you seem to forget is that there is a mosque standing on temple mount these days, not a temple.

[Sikander]

The Israelis should tear that piece of sh!t down.

[dannubis]

as for your balance question: hand ... feeding ... not biting

as for you provocation:
perhaps in the eyes of the lebanese people is that what you percieve as two different conflicts in fact one long string of misery ?

and like it or not, but it was the israelis and not syria that was shooting at them the last time.

BTW, i think both the hezbollah and the israeli governement are both to blame in what is happening now. in equal share

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Flip McWho
They're not...

We're starting to get somewhere. Now I just need someone to admit what I already know and say who's interests actually are being served by starting this conflict.

It doesn't stop the fact that Hizbullah have helped their people though.

I never questioned that fact though. It's how the organization recruits fighters and builds its powerbase of support.

Originally posted by dannubis
UNPROVOKED aggression ?

Yes, I do believe I said that.

you are funny

Ming likely won't allow me to say what I think you are atm.

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by dannubis
as for your balance question: hand ... feeding ... not biting

Oh, really?

as for you provocation:
perhaps in the eyes of the lebanese people is that what you percieve as two different conflicts in fact one long string of misery ?

That's nonsense. It's maybe Hzb seeing (and selling) it that way to make a connection to the Palestinian conflict to gain further legitimation as a "resistance movement", but certainly not the Lebanese people as a whole. I don't remember the non-Hzb part advocating a guerilla war or a terror campaign against Israel before this started. Let's not forget that a good part of the Lebanese displayed strong anti-Syrian feelings not too long ago, and for good reasons. That they are now (Hzb or not) against Israel is no wonder, but even when many of them currently support Hzb in its fight against Israel it doesn't mean they all support the long-term goals/strategy of Hzb or that they all just forget the little role Syria played in their country.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Did WaPo reporter Thomas Ricks actually say this?

om Ricks, you've covered a number of military conflicts, including Iraq, as I just mentioned. Is civilian casualties increasingly going to be a major media issue? In conflicts where you don't have two standing armies shooting at each other?

THOMAS RICKS, REPORTER, "THE WASHINGTON POST": I think it will be. But I think civilian casualties are also part of the battlefield play for both sides here. One of the things that is going on, according to some military analysts, is that Israel purposely has left pockets of Hezbollah rockets in Lebanon, because as long as they're being rocketed, they can continue to have a sort of moral equivalency in their operations in Lebanon.

KURTZ: Hold on, you're suggesting that Israel has deliberately allowed Hezbollah to retain some of it's fire power, essentially for PR purposes, because having Israeli civilians killed helps them in the public relations war here?

RICKS: Yes, that's what military analysts have told me.


KURTZ: That's an extraordinary testament to the notion that having people on your own side killed actually works to your benefit in that nobody wants to see your own citizens killed but it works to your benefit in terms of the battle of perceptions here.

RICKS: Exactly. It helps you with the moral high ground problem, because you know your operations in Lebanon are going to be killing civilians as well.

**

KURTZ: Tom Ricks, "The New York Times" reported the other day, quote, "Israel is now fighting to win the battle of perceptions," which to me says the battle of headlines. And, in fact, an Israeli cabinet minister was quoted, not by name, as saying, "That the narrative at the end, is part of the problem." I'm starting to hear echoes of Iraq.

RICKS: Echoes of Iraq, yes. But also the Israelis are very sophisticated in their handling of the media. They consider it part of the battlefield, officially. The word "narrative" always comes up with conversations with Israeli national security officials. They consider shaping the narrative, the battle for the narrative, to be key as part of any war fighting. So they see the media as part of the battlefield. And, in fact, there's some belief from our reporters that they have occasionally targeted the media.

Reliable Sources Transcript

Moonbattery at its finest.

[dannubis]

True, but it isn't the north of lebanon that is fighting Israel.

All I said is that after 30 years of warfare every side has done it fair share of 'provocing'.

BTW, do we have an idea of how many of the fighting members of Hezbollah are of Palestinian descent ?