The Middle East Continues...

[GePap]

Originally posted by Edan


Kind of like support for Bush reached 90+%. But it's a hollow support and signs are that it's already beginning to crack

That 90% support for Bush, did go down, but last time I looked, it was enough to keep him in power.

Hizbullah has as your own article noted become even more rooted now in the Shiite community, and while the anti-Syrian folks speak out vs. it again now, what can they do? They are broken up themselves and have sho9wn no ability to macth Hizbullah is any organizational field. Hizbullah is off an running rebuilding- where is the central government? Making speeches.

[Sirotnikov]

Except that the Defense minister specifically stated that Hizbullah would keep the cease fire and he specifically meant Palestinian militant groups backed by Syria in his comment.

And all indications are that Hizbullah would keep the cease fire. After all, Hizbullah's missions occur with a purpose. There is no purpose in random attacks vis Israel for no reason. They still have the two IDF soliders, and it appears that they were correct, that military force would fail to get tham back to Israel.

Where are we disagreeing then?

The only point is that I think that the Def. minister does in a (small manner) challenges Hezbullah and attempts to bind its freedom to a national concensus by saying that if there is no statement/declaration of war (by Hezbullah, presumably), then anyone found comitting violence will be dealt with.

It is supposed to limit their freedom to perform single strikes (in hope to provoke Israel). I think that Hezbullah's interest coincides (like you said).

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by GePap


The Lebanese press did a poll of Lebanese, all Lebanese, not only Shiites. During the crisis it had the support of 98% of Shhites, 90+ of sunnis and over 85% of Christians.

Read the Lebanon Daily Star for five minutes and your assertion that Hizbullah is not popular amongst the whole spectrum of the population falls apart instantly.

As more evidence, far more indicative than polls, note how Sunni regimes, after denouncing Hizbullah at the start, ALL back down and began to praise Hizbullah due to mass popular appeals.

I am apt to believe what 95% of all sources tell me is correct, specially when supported by common sense.

I'm very much skeptical that 85% support for Hezbullah among christians is reliable.

I'd like to see the question for clues.

Alsol, I am interested in the exact source. I'm not very eluquent in Lebanese media, but I can check it out.

[Sirotnikov]

Read the Lebanon Daily Star for five minutes and your assertion that Hizbullah is not popular amongst the whole spectrum of the population falls apart instantly.

The sharp criticism of Huzbullah by Hariri and Junblat are proof enough that there is a tremendous amount of discontent with Hezbullah in some populations. Those two do not pronounce their personal views, rather that of their constituency.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov

The sharp criticism of Huzbullah by Hariri and Junblat are proof enough that there is a tremendous amount of discontent with Hezbullah in some populations. Those two do not pronounce their personal views, rather that of their constituency.

What a bold assertion to make.

So Siniora speaks only for himself then?

[GePap]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov


I'm very much skeptical that 85% support for Hezbullah among christians is reliable.

I'd like to see the question for clues.

Alsol, I am interested in the exact source. I'm not very eluquent in Lebanese media, but I can check it out.

On the poll:

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brmiddleeastnafricara/236.php?nid=&id=&pnt=236&lb=

http://www.beirutcenter.info/default.asp?contentid=692&MenuID=46

The numbers on Christians was 80%, not 85%+ and Sunnis close to 90%, not over 90%.

That said, the numbers are there if you want ot check them out.

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by GePap


What a bold assertion to make.

So Siniora speaks only for himself then?

Strawman alert

I never said that. I merely proved that there is a large opposition for Hezbullah and syrian backed policies, by demonstrating that christian and druze backed leaders do not support Hezbullah.

And anyway, we know very well who pulls the strings for Siniora and president lahoud I'd say they hardly speak for their people.

[Sirotnikov]

RE: http://www.beirutcenter.info/default...=692&MenuID=46

Did you support the resistance's move to capture two Israeli soldiers for a prisoners swap?
Shiite: 96% support
Sunni: 73% support
Druze: 40% support
Christian: 55% support.

Notice the poll was taken on the 29th of July. I'm sure had that been asked near the beginning of the conflict the support figures would have been lower.

Beyond learning of the "objective" and "neutral" language of the poll (" Do you support the [just] confrontations carried out by the resistance against the [evil] Israeli aggression against Lebanon "), I also learnt that this poll is hard to rely upon.

Notice the following quesiton:

Do you believe the government assumed its responsibility to relieve the displaced?

The result is close to 50%-50% with a slight edge for "NO".

This figure strikes me as odd (while not glaringly false).
Since it is Hezbullah with the larger presense, that is rebuilding and aiding the local population, and the GOL did nothing. Infact it had to be forced into helping the south lebanese and sending government troops and forces there .

[GePap]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
Notice the poll was taken on the 29th of July. I'm sure had that been asked near the beginning of the conflict the support figures would have been lower.

Probably, but how does that help your point? What matter's is Hizbullah's popularity AFTER, not before.

The result is close to 50%-50% with a slight edge for "NO".

This figure strikes me as odd (while not glaringly false).
Since it is Hezbullah with the larger presense, that is rebuilding and aiding the local population, and the GOL did nothing. Infact it had to be forced into helping the south lebanese and sending government troops and forces there .

Why would it be questionable at all?

Once the refugees left southern Lebanon and Hizbullah territory, it falls on the central government to find places for them, and this is specailly true for the residents of the southern Lebanese suburbs flattened. Besides, the poll occured long before the cease-fre, meaning that recosntruction issues were non-issues.

The question is not about rebuilding, but whether the Central government was doing a good job of taking care of the internal refugees.

The most important figure for that question I would note is massive Shiia unhappiness with the Central Government.

[GePap]

An interesting op-ed from haaretz. If only this kind of opinion made it to the pages of American newspapers...

The occupier defines justice
By Amira Hass

On Jerusalem's Jabotinsky Street, opposite the President's Residence, a medium-sized plaque is fixed on a locked gate, enclosing a broad building and a lovely garden: "This building was the location of the British Mandate Government's High Military Court, which held the trials of the Hebrew resistance fighters from the Haganah, Etzel and Lehi." The sign bears the emblems of the Jerusalem municipality and the three resistance organizations. It further notes: "The resistance fighters refused to acknowledge the authority of the court to judge them, and asked to be recognized as prisoners of war."

The speaker of the Palestinian Authority's parliament, who was arrested two weeks ago by the Israel Defense Forces, also refused to acknowledge the authority of the Military Court to judge him. Obviously the two latest detainees, whose arrest was deemed by Israel to be the appropriate solution to its shortcomings in releasing kidnapped soldier Gilad Shalit, will make the same declaration. Nasser A-Shaer, the Palestinian education minister and deputy prime minister, and Mahmoud Ramahi, chief whip of the Palestinian Legislative Council, were arrested on Saturday and Sunday. Incidentally, the Palestinians have lately ceased using the verb "arrested" in regards to the arrests of Palestinians by Israeli soldiers. Instead they use the verb "abducted."

These three detainees/abducted join about 10,000 other Palestinian prisoners and detainees. As with the prisoners of the Hebrew resistance, who saw themselves as POWs regardless of their actions (killing British soldiers or Arab civilians), some Palestinians request that their prisoners be declared POWs. Others prefer the definition of political prisoners. Let's let the definitions rest. In any case, from the offense to the jailing, Israel, as an occupying force, plays around with the definitions as it sees fit.

Advertisement

On Sunday, at 4:30 A.M., IDF soldiers shot and killed a worker, Jalal Uda, 26, and injured three other Palestinian civilians. This happened not far from the Howara checkpoint, south of Nablus. Palestinian newspapers referred to it as the "crime scene." The young men rode a taxi in a road bypassing the checkpoints. For the last several weeks the army has again forbid young men under age 32 from leaving Nablus. But people have to make a living, and thousands are looking for hidden routes. An offense punishable by death, so it seems. The soldiers acted as prosecutor, judge and executioner. According to the rules of occupation, when soldiers kill Palestinian civilians, they and those who sent them are never criminals, suspects, accused or convicts. The brigadier general who limits the age of those who exit the Nablus compound, by virtue of his belonging to the "Defense Army" can also not be considered a criminal, suspect or convict.

When a Palestinian kills an Israeli - soldier or civilian - his name, picture and details of his indictment will be published. He will automatically be condemned to life in jail, and his prime minister or the leader of his organization will be considered responsible and hence a target for arrest or assassination. The soldiers who kill Palestinian civilians are sheltering under the wide apron of the occupation army. Their names will not be known in public, and their prime minister and commanders will not be deemed accountable.

The Palestinian detainees are led to a military court: The same military establishment that occupies and destroys and suppresses the civilian population is the one that determines that to resist occupation - even by popular demonstrations and waving flags, not only by killing and bearing arms - is a crime. It is the one to prosecute, and it is the one to judge. Its judges are loyal to the interest of defending the occupier and the settler.

Allegedly every Palestinian is tried, convicted and jailed as a private person who committed a criminal offense. But a sharp discrimination in the conditions of imprisonment proves that the Palestinian security prisoner is punished not as an individual, but as a representative of a group, as part of its overall suppression. Contrary to international law, the majority of Palestinian prisoners and detainees are not held in the occupied territory, but rather inside Israel. Contrary to popular myth, Israel does not respect the right to regular family visits.

The army does its best to disrupt the visitation schedule, using various security and technical excuses. Only relations of the first degree (parents, siblings and children) are allowed to visit the prisoners, but hundreds of them have not had the privilege of any visits for several years. The right to make daily use of a telephone is given to the most dangerous of criminal prisoners, and is denied from Palestinian security prisoners, among them citizens and residents of Israel. This is done via a weak and unconvincing excuse of a security establishment that has advanced and effective surveillance devices. The path of sentence reduction and clemency is open to the Jew (especially when he is a settler) and is almost hermetically shut to the Palestinian.

It is no wonder that the Palestinians support every action - such as kidnapping soldiers - that tries to break the rules of this discrimination game. Every Palestinian prisoner's personal history is an expression of the freedom Israel allows itself in the implanting of an extreme subculture of double standard, discriminating blood from blood, human being from human being, nation from nation.

[GePap]

And this puppy. BUt we all know Amnesty International is filled with Nazis, Islamic fundamentalists, child rapists, and all sorts of other dispicable people, cause only bad people would make the following claims:

Aftermath
Human Rights Group Accuses Israel of War Crimes in Lebanon

By JOHN KIFNER
Published: August 24, 2006

BEIRUT, Lebanon, Aug. 23 — Amnesty International accused Israel on Wednesday of war crimes in its monthlong battle with Hezbollah, saying its bombing campaign amounted to indiscriminate attacks on Lebanon’s civilian infrastructure and population.

“Many of the violations examined in this report are war crimes that give rise to individual criminal responsibility,” Amnesty International, the London-based human rights group, said in a report on the Israeli campaign. “They include directly attacking civilian objects and carrying out indiscriminate or disproportionate attacks.”

“During more than four weeks of ground and aerial bombardment by the Israeli armed forces, the country’s infrastructure suffered destruction on a catastrophic scale,” the report said, contending that this was “an integral part of the military strategy.”

“Israeli forces pounded buildings into the ground,” the report went on, “reducing entire neighborhoods to rubble and turning villages and towns into ghost towns as their inhabitants fled the bombardments.

“Main roads, bridges and petrol stations were blown to bits. Entire families were killed in airstrikes on their homes or in their vehicles while fleeing the aerial assaults on their villages. Scores lay buried beneath the rubble of their houses for weeks, as the Red Cross and other rescue workers were prevented from accessing the areas by continuing Israeli strikes.”

Mark Regev, the spokesman for Israel’s Foreign Ministry, categorically rejected the claim that Israel had “acted outside international norms or international legality concerning the rules of war.” Unlike Hezbollah, he said, Israel did not target the civilian population, nor did it indiscriminately target Lebanese civilian infrastructure.

He added: “Our job was made very difficult by the fact that Hezbollah adopted a deliberate policy of positioning itself inside civilian areas and breaking the first fundamental distinction under the rules of war, by deliberately endangering civilians. Under the rules of war, you are legally entitled to target infrastructure that your enemy is exploiting for its military campaign.”

Citing a variety of sources, the Amnesty International report said Israel’s air force had carried out more than 7,000 air attacks, while the navy had fired 2,500 shells. The human toll, according to Lebanese government statistics, was estimated at 1,183 deaths, mostly civilians, about a third of them children; 4,054 wounded; and 970,000 people displaced, out of a population of a little under four million.

“Statements from the Israeli military officials seem to confirm that the destruction of the infrastructure was indeed a goal of the military campaign,” the report said. It said that “in village after village the pattern was similar: the streets, especially main streets, were scarred with artillery craters along their length. In some cases, cluster bomb impacts were identified.”

“Houses were singled out for precision-guided missile attacks and were destroyed, totally or partially, as a result,” the report said. “Business premises such as supermarkets or food stores and auto service stations and petrol stations were targeted.

“With the electricity cut off and food and other supplies not coming into the villages, the destruction of supermarkets and petrol stations played a crucial role in forcing local residents to leave.”

The Amnesty International report said the widespread destruction of apartments, houses, electricity and water services, roads, bridges, factories and ports, in addition to several statements by Israeli officials, suggested a policy of punishing the Lebanese government and the civilian population in an effort to get them to turn against Hezbollah.

“The evidence strongly suggests that the extensive destruction of public works, power systems, civilian homes and industry was a deliberate and integral part of the military strategy rather than collateral damage,” the report said.

It also noted a statement from the Israeli military chief of staff, Lt. Gen Dan Halutz, calling Hezbollah a “cancer” that Lebanon must get rid of “because if they don’t, their country will pay a very high price.”

The Amnesty International report came as a number of international aid and human rights agencies used the current lull in fighting to assess the damage.

The United Nations Development Program said the attacks had obliterated most of the progress Lebanon had made in recovering from the devastation of the civil war years. “Fifteen years of work have been wiped out in a month,” Jean Fabre, a spokesman for the organization in Geneva, told reporters.

Another urgent issue, aid groups say, is the number of unexploded bomblets from cluster bombs littering the southern villages. Tekimiti Gilbert, the operations chief of a United Nations mine removal team, told reporters in Tyre: “Up to now there are at least 170 cluster bomb strikes in south Lebanon. It’s a huge problem. There are obvious dangers with people, children, cars. People are tripping over these things.”

United Nations officials say at least five children have been killed by picking up the bomblets scattered about by the cluster bombs.

Despite the cease-fire, southern Lebanon remained tense on Wednesday. Three Lebanese soldiers were killed trying to defuse a rocket that had not exploded. An Israeli soldier was killed and two others wounded when, according to the Israeli military, they walked over a minefield that Israel had previously buried.

The Israeli military also said it had fired artillery rounds from the disputed territory of Shabaa Farms to the Lebanese village of Shabaa. There were no reports of casualties.

Greg Myre contributed reporting from Jerusalem for this article.

EDIT: and a link to the report itself for those interested:

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE180072006

[Sikander]

Originally posted by GePap
And this puppy. BUt we all know Amnesty International is filled with Nazis, Islamic fundamentalists, child rapists, and all sorts of other dispicable people, cause only bad people would make the following claims:

I find all of that quite reasonable. None of it should be considered war crimes. Proportionality? What a joke. Attacking transportation infrastructure, fuel supplies, food supplies, destroying shelter? As old as war itself, and completely reasonable. Firing directly at known civilians (ie not members of hizb. dressed in civilian clothes) should be a warcrime, but trying to seperate the fighters from the civilian population that they hide behind is reasonable, even if it means effectively depopulating the area of operations.

[dannubis]

maybe reasonable for you from the other side of the world...

but certainly not so reasonable for those people who had no love for israel in the first place and whose house is very reasonable being destroyed... not to mention family and friends that are very reasonably being killed

Israel may have succeeded in diminishing the shi'ites capacity to wage war, but they sure bought themselves another decade of terrorism.

[Eli]

As if another decade of terrorism wasnt coming anyway.

[dannubis]

you know full well what i mean