News Will Israel's Strikes Escalate to Full-Scale War?

[Anttech]

You respect Hizbullah. You excuse their behaviour as a rule of nature. You expect Israel to continually be attacked only to be neutered by the world when it tries to defend itself:

k Yonzo, if you want I will look at Israel with the same respect as I look at hezbollah. IE NONE

Once again, you are attempting to project what you like onto me, and (purposefully?) are trying to twist what I say. if this continues I will not continue debating you!

Oh but we do have a higher standard. We sanctify life, while they sanctify death. When we attack, we do so to prevent harm - when they attack, they mean to inflict it. We drop leaflets and send out radio broadcasts and recorded phone messages. They send out threats. Having read the definition for respect, I hope you realize this doesn't mean we're any more respected than they are. Quite the opposite. Just like the UN is disrespected by almost everyone.

Oxymoron: And you are TRYING to harm Hezbollah, and the infrastructure of Lebanon.

In military science, an attack is the aggressive attempt to conquer enemy territory, installations, personnel, or equipment or to deny the enemy the use of territory, installations, personnel, or equipment, for example by destroying the equipment. A defending force may defend themselves, surrender, or launch a counter-attack. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack

The UN is respected, and is acknowledge by all leaders of the free world as a vehicle for allowing countries to voice grievances, and for government to multilaterally decide and act on problems. I'll admit it isn't perfect, But it is better than No UN.

Now perhaps you can answer my question - what would you call the Israelis that will die from Hizbullah rockets if Israel agreed to a ceasefire? Is that not collateral damage? Are you not expecting Israel to accept it?

Victims of a terrorist attack, no but I am expecting I will say this the last time more thought, and more respect for lebaonese life (and UN life). I am expecting you to behave like a civilised country, not like a raging bull.

I don't see how that can be misinterpreted like that. Read the sentence - slowly this time, you missed a few words in the middle there. The IDF targeted the **Hizbullah guerillas** that swarmed the post.

Man, this is trying. You accept that Israel knew there were UN observers inside the post that was *supposedly* swarmed by Hezbollah, yet you still fired on them. This action brings the people who did this down to the same level as the hezbullah terrorists, who fire indescrimently on Israeli targets, not caring for the consequences.

It depends on the threat. In some cases - yes. First, they are soldiers. Unlike civilians, they have chosen this profession and volunteered for their service.

Well using your logic, you choose to move to Israel, you have the choice to leave. (That was an example, I don't actually believe this, I said this to show what your statements look like) The UN PEACEKEEPERS were there UNARMED, they function similar to the press.

 

[Anttech]

Originally Posted by Anttech
Anyway again, you are reading what you want. I am saying that you are punishing the whole of Lebanon to get at the few.
I think I know better than you what is motivating us right now, and it's not a need for punishment.

I never mentioned motivation I said it factually, you know like what you are actually doing.

750,000 people now displaced
425 people killed

 

[Yonoz]

Oxymoron

Please explain.

Victims of a terrorist attack, no but I am expecting I will say this the last time more thought, and more respect for lebaonese life (and UN life). I am expecting you to behave like a civilised country, not like a raging bull.

And what would a civilized country do?

Man, this is trying.

Yes it is, do you want to drop it?

You accept that Israel knew there were UN observers inside the post that was *supposedly* swarmed by Hezbollah, yet you still fired on them. This action brings the people who did this down to the same level as the hezbullah terrorists, who fire indescrimently on Israeli targets, not caring for the consequences.

No, because the fire was meant to kill the Hizbullah guerillas, and was not meant to kill the UN personnel. Hizbullah launches rockets with the full intent of killing innocent people.

Well using your logic, you choose to move to Israel, you have the choice to leave. (That was an example, I don't actually believe this, I said this to show what your statements look like) The UN PEACEKEEPERS were there UNARMED, they function similar to the press.

Well I would take the killing of an Israeli inside Israel with a little less disgust than I would the killing of an Israeli who fled Israel. It's the lesser of two evils - the killing of the UN volunteer and soldier by profession or the killing of the innocent civilian.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

Please explain.

Oxymoron is a contradiction in terms such as a deafening silence or military intelligence and friendly fire.

 

[Anttech]

The killing of an observer, or the press, can be construed in many different ways. When the dust settles I hope we will find out why this act actually happened. If the killing of the UN observers was so that nobody could see what was going to happen, ie to kill the witnesses, then it is indeed very bad. I respect all life, I don't respect Israeli life more than I do Chinese or Canadian or Palisten.

No, because the fire was meant to kill the Hizbullah guerillas, and was not meant to kill the UN personnel. Hizbullah launches rocket with the full intent of killing innocent people.

But it did kill the UN observers. Are the Israeli army that stupid, that they think if you bomb a Hezbollah terrorist that is standing 2 meters away from a UN post, that the people in the UN post won't harmed? I don't think so. So it was intentional, anyway i hope this goes to the human rights courts.

Yes it is, do you want to drop it?

Ok let's drop that, and wait for the International Courts deal with your soldiers.

 

[Yonoz]

I never mentioned motivation I said it factually, you know like what you are actually doing.

750,000 people now displaced
425 people killed

Did Israel also "punish" its own civilians? You know: the ones who died or were injured, the ones who are in shelters for over two weeks, the ones who fled the north? It's a national crisis, caring for the displaced families. Hotels in the south are filled to an unprecedented state. The Jewish agency has organised summer camps for the children all over the country, while their parents are in the shelter in the north. We are also "punished" here, and we have no joy in watching the Lebanese suffer. But Hizbullah must not be allowed to threaten Israel like that.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

Yeah yeah yeah,what you did isn't an eye for an eye, it's an eye for an arm and a leg. That's where the issue lies, not should Israel have the right to defend itself, should it have the right to beat someone and all the innocent bystanders who viewed the event into a bloody pulp and leave them in intensive care when that person merely slapped them. It's not hard to comprehend why this is a series of humanitarian laws infringements. Or why the only people defending this are those carrying out the attacks or those on that side, and the US atm, although God knows why, it's pretty apaulling, in my and just about everyone I knows opinion. Not that anecdotal evidence means jack, so basically try looking at the world news, there's condemnation all over the shop. Need to repeat what people have already said a dozen times on the off chance you'll understand at least to some tiny extent what the ussue with your campaign is. 2 for 378, 189 innocent lives for 1 non innocent life. That should be nice and clear now. Anyway I suggested we drop it ages ago, it's not like Yonoz understands the moral issues at hand or if he does he's having a hard time dealing with it rationally, which is understandable, it's like being involved in a fight and then trying to rationalise how many people you stomped afterwards to the police, your the injured party not them.

 

[Anttech]

yes,

I will second that. You don't have to believe me. But Every single person I have spoke to (including my ex-girlfriend who is a Jew) has condemn the attacks on Lebanon as brutal and totally over the top.

You are not the only country in the world who lives under terrorism, and nor will you be the last. However you do not have the right to smash Lebanon to the ground in reaction to 20 or so citizens, who have been killed! The IRA killed many more than this in the UK, yet (crazy as it may sound) the UK government didnt drop bombs all over Dublin, because we knew that the IRA was not the Irish government, nor the Irish people.

 

[Yonoz]

I will second that. You don't have to believe me. But Every single person I have spoke to (including my ex-girlfriend who is a Jew) has condemn the attacks on Lebanon as brutal and totally over the top.

Even common misperceptions are still, nonetheless, misperceptions. The http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/677332/posts" lives on.

You are not the only country in the world who lives under terrorism, and nor will you be the last. However you do not have the right to smash Lebanon to the ground in reaction to 20 or so citizens, who have been killed!

You're using those distorting superlatives again. Lebanon is not being "smashed to the ground". We have every right to defend ourselves from an ongoing attack.

The IRA killed many more than this in the UK, yet (crazy as it may sound) the UK government didnt drop bombs all over Dublin, because we knew that the IRA was not the Irish government, nor the Irish people.

That's because the IRA were not sitting in Ireland raining rockets on Britain. If that were the case I guarantee you they would have hit them much harder.

 

[Anttech]

That's because the IRA were not sitting in Ireland raining rockets on Britain. If that were the case I guarantee you they would have hit them much harder.

Nah, they were just planting bombs in the London Underground, Outside Downing Street, in most major cities. They were ambushing UK Soliders in N.Ireland the list is long. As I said before 3000 people died in the troubles.

The reason the UK didnt fly f16 into Dublin, is because they understand the art of counter-terrorism. Hearts and Minds, create a political Avenue, allow for greivances to be heard, and acted on.

 

[Yonoz]

Nah, they were just planting bombs in the London Underground, Outside Downing Street, in most major cities. They were ambushing UK Soliders in N.Ireland the list is long. As I said before 3000 people died in the troubles.

You fail to see the point. There weren't any rockets launched from Ireland, so there's no reason to drop bombs there, is there? Do you think we're just dropping bombs wherever we feel like?

The reason the UK didnt fly f16 into Dublin, is because they understand the art of counter-terrorism. Hearts and Minds, create a political Avenue, allow for greivances to be heard, and acted on.

Why would the want to fly an F16 there in the first place?

 

[Yonoz]

BTW last time I checked Northern Ireland was still part of the UK.

 

[Anttech]

BTW last time I checked Northern Ireland was still part of the UK.

Yes it is part of the UK, what is your point? The IRA were attacking the UK Soldiers in N.I.

The point is the British intelligence knew where they were, they were killing British civilians yet we didnt go in with bombs blowing up where we thought they lived. The delivery system of death is totally Irrelevant.

Do you believe that Israel life's are more important that British lifes?

 

[Yonoz]

Yes it is part of the UK, what is your point? The IRA were attacking the UK Soldiers in N.I.

That's funny because I figured if you're comparing the two conflicts then Britain must have pulled out of Northern Ireland.

The point is the British intelligence knew where they were, they were killing British civilians yet we didnt go in with bombs blowing up where we thought they lived. The delivery system of death is totally Irrelevant.

Irrelevant? What is Israel attacking in Lebanon, trucks carrying plumbing supplies?

Do you believe that Israel life's are more important that British lifes?

I wonder what do you think the British government would do if it pulled out of Northern Ireland, the Irish government allowed the IRA to arm itself to the teeth with over 12000 rockets and then one day just started firing them at Manchester and Liverpool, creating desertion and days reminiscent of the battle of Britain.
Lucky for them, they had freedom for their security forces since they were on UK soil and the IRA never had ground-ground rockets, let alone 12000. Those are the really big differences.

 

[Curious6]

Anttech, it's not hard to see your analogy to the IRA and the UK is flawed.

 

[Gokul43201]

Anttech, it's not hard to see your analogy to the IRA and the UK is flawed.

Curious6, it is good practice to support an assertion like that with an argument. What you've just done is a hit and run.

 

[Curious6]

Gokul43201, it's not a 'hit and run'. I was limiting myself to giving my opinion about the IRA/UK analogy being debated - for me, it's quite clear from the discussion between Anntech and Yonoz that the comparison is not an accurate one.

 

[kyleb]

Yonoz simply overlooked where Anntech was drawing his comparison; the IRA did arm itself to the teeth because the British government had their forces on Irish soil, much the same as a the Muslim extremist minority does against Israel today.

 

[daveb]

This has turned into an "I'm right" - "No, I'm right" argument. Yonoz will never believe that Israel is overreacting and Anttech will never believe that Israel is just defending itself. Can we move on please?

 

[kyleb]

Yes, we should talk about Israel's continuing control and expansion over the past four decades onto land beyond the Green Line. How would like to have been born into the other side of that?

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

BTW last time I checked Northern Ireland was still part of the UK.

That's because the majority of it's population are Loyalists(pro UK government) If they want devolution they have but to vote for it, but with little support for it in the country it is unlikely in my lifetime to become a reality. To the IRA's credit though they still maintain a hope of union with Ireland by purely political means. When the last IRA member shot a loylaist in 2005 they offered to have him shot as recompense, that's a bold statement of solidarity behind a peace cause, the familly of the victim refused though, and rightly so, shows real human decency in an ability to forgive and forget on both sides. Just FYI, the reason why the UK maintains control is a democratic one.

That's because the IRA were not sitting in Ireland raining rockets on Britain. If that were the case I guarantee you they would have hit them much harder.

The anlogoy is apt because the IRA bombed many civillian centres in the UK, the 600 dead civillians you see are mostly perpetrated against England on English soil.One of the worst of which was the Manchester bombing.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/june/15/newsid_2527000/2527009.stm

1996: Huge explosion rocks central Manchester
A massive bomb has devastated a busy shopping area in central Manchester.

Two hundred people were injured in the attack, mostly by flying glass, and seven are said to be in a serious condition. Police believe the IRA planted the device.

The bomb exploded at about 1120 BST on Corporation Street outside the Arndale shopping centre.

It is the seventh attack by the Irish Republican group since it broke its ceasefire in February and is the second largest on the British mainland.

A local television station received a telephone warning at 1000 BST - just as the city centre was filling up with Saturday shoppers.

The caller used a recognised IRA codeword.

One hour and 20 minutes after the warning, police were still clearing hundreds of people from a huge area of central Manchester.

Army bomb disposal experts were using a remote-controlled device to examine a suspect van parked outside Marks & Spencer when it blew up in an uncontrolled explosion.

This is not an atypical situation of 30 years of terrorists explosions around the UK.

 

[Bystander]

Thats a contradiction, make your mind up. Either they didnt fire on the UN post or they did, tactical necessity is irrelevant.

"Tactical necessities" are the only "relevant" factors in warfare.

UN Observers are not acceptable 'collateral damage' under any circumstances, (snip)

You referee a hockey game you're going to get hit with the puck. You take a "nitwitness news team" to the front, you're going to get hurt. You man a UN outpost in the middle of a war zone, you abandon it when the shooting starts, because the psychopaths are going to be using you for cover if you don't, and that's going to draw the other side's fire.

 

[kyleb]

So either or the report of the emails is right in suggesting it was a tactical necessity, or the Israeli ambassador is right in saying it was a mistake.

 

[Bystander]

So either or the report of the emails is right in suggesting it was a tactical necessity, or the Israeli ambassador is right in saying it was a mistake.

What's the "or" sh*t? It's a "tactical necessity" that the Israelis deliberately target the psychopaths; it's an accident, unfortunate side effect, mistake (given lousy language translations) that the UN observers incurred casualties.

Believe it or not, this is the kind of thing that happens when some raving maniac starts a war. B*tch out the raving maniac for being so incredibly stupid in the first place, b*tch out the nincompoops who gave the raving maniac sanctuary, b*tch out the people who bankroll the raving maniac, but don't go griping to the people trying to clean up the mess.

 

[Office_Shredder]

Yonoz simply overlooked where Anntech was drawing his comparison; the IRA did arm itself to the teeth because the British government had their forces on Irish soil, much the same as a the Muslim extremist minority does against Israel today.

You mean the Israeli forces that weren't on Lebanese soil for six years?

 

[kyleb]

I mean where Israel has been controlling and expanding beyond the Green Line for nearly forty years.

 

[kyleb]

What's the "or" sh*t? It's a "tactical necessity" that the Israelis deliberately target the psychopaths; it's an accident, unfortunate side effect, mistake (given lousy language translations) that the UN observers incurred casualties.

Either Israeli did deliberately targeted the location, or they made a mistake. It is one or the other.

 

[Bystander]

Either Israeli did deliberately targeted the location, or they made a mistake. It is one or the other.

There is NO "excluded middle." This is exactly how Arabs and M(o,u)sl(e,i)ms have lost every war they started in the 20th century, and will lose every war they start in the 21st --- no logic skills.

 

[Yonoz]

I mean where Israel has been controlling and expanding beyond the Green Line for nearly forty years.

I was referring to the fact that the British could deal with the IRA on British soil. The IDF was not in Lebanon for 6 years now, hence the dissonance between the two cases, making the example void.

 

[MeJennifer]

There is NO "excluded middle." This is exactly how Arabs and M(o,u)sl(e,i)ms have lost every war they started in the 20th century, and will lose every war they start in the 21st --- no logic skills.

That is just racism, plain and simple.