Hezbollah must stop this cowardly blending among women and children

[oberliner]

"Consistently, from the Hezbollah heartland, my message was that Hezbollah must stop this cowardly blending ... among women and children. I heard they were proud because they lost very few fighters and that it was the civilians bearing the brunt of this. I don't think anyone should be proud of having many more children and women dead than armed men."

- Jan Egeland
U.N. humanitarian chief

source: http://uk.news.yahoo.com/24072006/140/aid-chief-blasts-cowardly-hizbollah.html

[TallahasseeGrannie]

1. For once I agree with Mr. Egeland

[smacky44]

75. Are they really hiding among women and children or is Israel just

bombing women and children to bolter their argument?

[Codeine]

78. Yeah, Israel bombs kids on purpose.

Then cooks them up for Passover. :eyes:

[LostinVA]

185. Great strawman

Bringing in all the old crazy myths about Jews to excuse the Israeli government's recent atrocities.

[Codeine]

200. No less ridiculous

than the post I replied to, which implied that Israel was deliberately attacking civilians to make their argument that Hezbollah is hiding among them more believable.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

191. My impression is that they don't necessarily "hide'

but that they certainly mingle and it provides protection because most states will back off rather than kill innocents. The concept conflicts me, because I think to myself if they did not have that certainty, it would save lives in the long run. But in order to take that illusion away from them, innocents will die.

Rock and a hard place.

I'm going out to the garden and turning the TV off.

[papau]

187. explains the high number of civilian deaths that Hez wants and are getting

n/t

[Dorian Gray]

193. Me too

I don't support Israel's overzealousness here, but I also think that Hezbollah is acting the coward by hiding in the homes of regular old people.

[brentspeak]

2. Amen

Terror groups like Hezbollah are cowards.

[Ms. Clio]

3. another quote

He called Israel's offensive "disproportionate" and "a violation of international humanitarian law."

[peacebird]

6. exactly.

I fear Israel has lost my support with their ham-fisted actions on this one.

[porphyrian]

4. Any soldier who hides behind civilians is a coward.

Any militant organization that does so repeatedly as a strategy is both cowardly and reprehensible. This doesn't excuse the killing of civilians to get to that organization, however.

[peacebird]

5. Israel has a kick ass military armed by the US

Is it any surprise that a group fighting them and defending their own homeland would resort to subterfuge?

Kind of how the Iraqi fight the occupying army as well - no?

[oberliner]

7. Defending their own homeland?

Hezbollah is a military group that the government of Lebanon and the international community has required to disarm.

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2006/07/20/1153166520816.html

HEZBOLLAH has created a "state within a state" in Lebanon and must be disarmed, the country's Prime Minister says.

Fouad Siniora said the Shiite militia had been doing the bidding of Syria and Iran, and could only be disarmed with the help of the international community once a ceasefire had been achieved.

"The entire world must help us disarm Hezbollah. But first we need to reach a ceasefire," Mr Siniora told Milan-based newspaper Corriere della Sera."

[brentspeak]

9. Hezbollah is not "defending their own homeland";

Hezbollah is illegally occupying southern Lebanon. In fact, the United Nations has demanded that Hezbollah disband and exit southern Lebanon.

[The Stranger]

11. You really can't be serious -- Hezbollah are Lebanese people.

How in the fuck could they illegally occupy their own land?

Were you just kidding around?

[brentspeak]

15. Uh, no. I'm not "kidding around."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_1559

[The Stranger]

46. You were supposed to link to something showing that they were

"illegally occupying Southern Lebanon."

That just doesn't quite get it.

[The Magistrate]

192. The United Nations Directuied Some Years Ago, Sir, That It Disarm

That it remains in arms in arms at all is therefore a violation of international law.

[truebrit71]

201. And of course Israel abides by all of the UN dirctives too right?

..well except for the 55 or so that they choose to ignore.... :eyes:

[Dorian Gray]

196. As human beings and Lebanese citizens

they are legally allowed to live there. As militants a part of the Hezbollah group, they are acting in violation of United Nations proclamations. They were told to disarm, yet they haven't. THAT is why they are there illegally.

[papau]

188. Hez are sh'ia - but not ID'd as Lebanese - of course there are Lebanese

among the members of Hez.

But Hez is not defending their country - Iranian finance Hez invaded Lebanon, converted local Shia to the cause, and now run the south while they pretend to be interested in a National Government existing in Lebanon with authority over all of Lebanon - just not any authority over them and the south.

[peacebird]

12. and how many UN edicts has Israel ignored over the years?

?

[Warren DeMontague]

19. Well, that's funny. What were they "defending" once Israel pulled out

in 2000-- by continuing to attack Israel?

[eridani]

164. If they continued to attack Israel, then why--

--are people in northern Israel now complaining about the poor repair of bomb shelters which fell out of use since 2000?

[Warren DeMontague]

170. If they *didn't* continue to attack Israel

how do you think this whole thing got started?

[eridani]

171. Something about a kidnapping was the official excuse, AFAIK

If it was bombs from Hezbollah, then why were Israeli bomb shelters effectively decommissioned?

[Warren DeMontague]

173. "official excuse". So, then, there was no kidnapping?

That's funny. Then why did Hezbollah ask for this guy:

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/world/15100638.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samir_Kuntar

http://news.monstersandcritics.com/middleeast/article_1180221.php/Kidnapping_of_soldiers_is_act_of_war_by_Lebanon_Olmert__Roundup_

as part of a "prisoner exchange" for the two soldiers it took in the kidnapping that never happened?

I didn't say it was bombs. Crossing into Israel, killing (eight died, two were kidnapped) and kidnapping soldiers to gain the release of a guy who smashed a 4 year old girl's head in with a rifle butt, to me, constitutes an "attack".

[eridani]

176. Right. Like if the Mafia takes out an overeager "made man"--

--that's an act of war? Bullshit. It was a crime, and should be so dealt with. It is certainly no excuse for destroying the infrastructure of the country where the crime was committed. That's the logic of Ward Churchill. Do you think that it should be open season on American civilians just because we re-elected Bush?

[Warren DeMontague]

177. A "crime"? Entering another country, killing and kidnapping soldiers?

You will also please note that nowhere have I said that Israel's actions have been anything but excessive. I think it needs to stop, I think we need an immediate ceasefire, and like the UN, I think we need an international force, along with Hezbollah disarming and returning the 2 soldiers (that's the UN talking, now)

But that wasn't the point we were discussing. We were discussing the FACT that Hezbollah attacked first. And if it was a "crime" that should be "so dealt with", who was going to deal with it, if not the Israelis? It wasn't going to be the government of Lebanon, which had consistently proven that it was unwilling to or incapable of disarming Hezbollah, even as all the other militias in that nation had disarmed.

Hezbollah started this. That doesn't mean Israel's response hasn't been excessive. It doesn't mean what we've seen in the past few days has been justified. But Hezbollah are terrorists, and they don't give a shit for the civilians of Lebanon. And the reason they have continued to attack Israel even though Israel had pulled out of Lebanon in 2000 is because they do not accept Israel's right to exist. Period.

[eridani]

180. So, if the government of Lebanon was unable to stop Hezbollah--

--why didn't the Israelis offer to help the Lebanese government instead of acting to destroy it? Israel has been kidnapping and assassinating in southern Lebanon for a long time as well, so who started it is about as irrelevant as which kid poked his brother in the back seat first.

[Warren DeMontague]

205. I'd recommend you do a little more research into what has been going on

down there for the past 60 years.

I don't think IDF soldiers on patrol are the moral equivalents of a guy who came ashore on an Israeli beach, stormed up into an Israeli town, broke into an apartment at random, terrorized a family with 2 small children, kidnapped the father and the four year old daughter, shot the father in front of the daughter so it would be "the last thing she ever saw", and then smashed her head in against a rock with a rifle butt.

That's a "hero", to grass-roots, civics minded Hezbollah.

Beyond that, as far as the Israeli response, I tend to agree with you. It's fucked up, they have caused more problems than they ever could hope to solve IMHO. Right now, I think the most important thing is to get a ceasefire.

[eridani]

208. The IDF does exactly the same thing to Palestinians on a daily basis

The only difference between them and Hezbollah is that they are far more heavily armed.

[Warren DeMontague]

209. Really.

Bull.

[eridani]

210. Justify this, then

http://www.rememberthesechildren.org/remember2006.html
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/stats/deaths.html

Thankfully, there are still Israelis who believe in the 'repair of the world'.
http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/2006/06/21/idf-assassination-misses-again-kills-two-palestinians-wounds-14/

[Warren DeMontague]

211. It's not justifiable. I've been opposed to the occupation for decades.

I was heartbroken when -despite the best efforts of the best, most committed, capable President we've had in the White House in my lifetime- the peace effort, which came damn close to a workable two state solution, fell apart in 2000.

The occupation is terrible. It's unworkable. It's untenable. But so is the agenda of groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, who will accept no "peace" that doesn't involve the destruction of Israel.

And despite your links, I still think it's a stretch to say that IDF soldiers are deliberately terrorizing families and smashing in the skulls of four year old girls - as Samir Kuntar was tried and convicted of doing - on a "daily basis".

But, whatever. You will believe what you will believe. I hope the region finds workable, long term peace. I hope the kids- all of them- stop dying.

In Lebanon, right now, I think we need a ceasefire. I think Israel has massively overreacted. But that doesn't grant Hezbollah any more legitimacy than they had before. Frankly, I hope the UN succeeds in disarming them and getting them out of there.

[eridani]

213. They are certainly terrorizing families

The 10+ dead Palestinian kids for every dead Israeli kid is testimony for that.

I don't think Hezbollah is legitmate either--it's just that its existence is an obvious response to the invasion of Lebanon and the murder of 17,000 Lebanese. Did you expect that they'd just sit there and let themselves be massacred?

I sometimes wonder if the recent Israeli aggression is precisely to ward off the threat of the acceptance of a two-state solution by Hamas.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article1115913.ece

Hamas bowed to the combination of an ultimatum from the Palestinian President, Mahmoud Abbas, and relentless international pressure last night by committing itself for the first time to a two-state solution of the conflict with Israel.

In an important step towards the recognition of Israel sought from Hamas by the international community, the Islamic faction agreed to a deal intended to pave the way for a new coalition government which Mr Abbas hopes will bolster his standing as a potential partner for peace negotiations with Israel.

[Warren DeMontague]

214. Well, I think we can both agree that we hope the extremists dont hold sway

on either side. I'd like nothing more than to see a free, prosperous Palestinian state living peacefully side by side with a free, prosperous Israel.

Right now, though, I'd just settle for the killing, maiming, bombing, burning and blowing up to stop. Enough. Enough. Enough.

[eridani]

215. Can't disagree with that

Seems that whenever anything approaching a settlement rears its head, extremists on both sides try to derail it.

[eyl]

182. Tehy weren't decommisioned

but people got overconfident.

There were Hizbullah attacks in May & November which struck civilian communities in Israel.

[LostinVA]

186. Hadn't heard that....

[smacky44]

81. But Israel said early on that no place in Lebanon would be safe.

Did we forget this? And remember, Israel bombs civilian homes with NO PROOF of any militants actually being inside in either Gaza or Lebanon. The media just prints the story the way Israel spins it and that's that. Recently though, there were several journalists reporting from Lebanon who had gone to some of the site bombed by Israel and proved that there was no Hizbollah presence. I think that both the US and Israel are surprised by the retaliation capability of Hizbollah and are trying to make excuses for the inability of the two greatest military forces on earth to absolutely vanquish their enemy with the massive bombing in both Iraq and Lebanon. And yes, the US and Israel will kill whomever they think is necessary...along the lines of the great Ann Coulter, "kill them all and let God sort them out." Did she say this or was she quoting some military general?

[cigsandcoffee]

160. What you call subterfuge...

...I call hiding behind innocent civilians, and standing by as they are slaughtered to protect your ability to terrorize a civilian population in Israel.

One man's crafty subterfuge warriors are another man's cowardly scumbags, I guess.

[robinlynne]

199. defending their own homeland?

hezbollah was not ont eh defensive, but on the offensive. I don't recall any Iraqis rocketing Americans. big difference between the two groups.

[Zynx]

206. It is still a scumy tactic.

Even if their cause was legitimate, which it is not(calling for the destruction of a people is not legitimate), it is disgusting.

[bigtree]

8. I agree completely

Neither I, nor Mr. Egeland believes that Israel should be firing back into those residential areas, though.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=1692942

[MrSlayer]

10. It is most cowardly but you can understand why they do it.

They simply cannot fight head up against any army, they'd be toast. By hiding among the civilians they can avoid being wiped out. And they get a lot of the civilians killed which provokes sympathy for them and hatred against the ones trying to kill them. You see that happening right here on this board. They are crazy but not stupid. It's unfortunate because it will be almost impossible to destroy these terrorists without killing a large number of innocents. The innocent blood is on their hands and their hands alone simply because of their tactics.

[SPKrazy]

20. Finally A Voice Of Reason n/t

[wordpix2]

100. you hit the nail on the head there

[Leopolds Ghost]

118. Add another quote to my list

"It's unfortunate because it will be almost impossible to
destroy these terrorists without killing a large number of innocents."

That's a juicy one.

For someone with a Wes Clark avatar, I'm surprised you haven't read up on basic military guerrilla tactics, by the way. The fact that they also resort to terrorism has very little to do with the present situation.

[springhill]

162. Oh I get it...........

Because Hezbollah uses the tactic of hiding behind civilians, Israel just can't help it, they have to kill the civilians. Okay, it all makes sense to me now.

[truedelphi]

172. Yep, Israel really just can't help it

I gave up on Israel some years ago when during one of their
attacks on Arafat's compound, the local neighborhood started to catch on fire.
Teachers, parents and children poured out of a local school and began running down the
street away from the fire and the Israeli airships started gunning them down.

The CNN announcer was only talking about Arafat's compound but the film footage
clearly showed the above scene.

What possible reason could there be for a helicopter zooming down over the
crowd of children and wounding a lot of them? The helicopter pilots were
almost looking at the kids' eyeball to eyeball. Damn Barbaric.

And today's newspaper headlines shriek that "Israelis massacre fleeing
Lebanese refugees" Many of them with white flags in their hands. Damn Barbaric.

Hizzbollah's rockerts are little more than glorified fireworks. If one lands on a house, it might take out 20% of the house. Meanwhile Israel is LEVELLING lebanon.

[MrSlayer]

204. They don't HAVE to kill the civilians.

That's just what happens because the terrorists hide among them. Is that so hard to understand? This is a really simple concept.



edit: skipped a letter.

[springhill]

212. Yes, it is a very simple concept..................

but one you don't seem to understand. If there is a GOOD chance you will be killing civilians, you just don't do it, period.

[jseankil]

13. Israels Actions are "a violation of international humanitarian law." -UN

He also said that.

[The Stranger]

14. They "blend in" to villages because they are VILLAGERS.

They don't have Dimona's or aircraft carriers or spy satellites. That is where they live.

What is this bullshit about hiding behind women and children? From the numbers of women and children being murdered by the IDF right now, THAT WOULD BE THAT LAST PLACE TO HIDE.

[cali]

16. So you agree with Mr. Egeland

when he rightly condemns Israel, but fly into a rage when he dares to criticize H'zbollah? How interesting.

[The Stranger]

47. When he is wrong, I will disagree with him.

Care to address the substance of the post instead of accusing me of "flying into a rage"?

THAT would be interesting.

[Solo_in_MD]

21. Which begs the question

How many of the reported casualties are Hezbollah and how many are civilians

[Solo_in_MD]

22. Which begs the question

How many of the reported casualties are Hezbollah and how many are civilians

[madeline_con]

58. And isn't it interesting that the women and children are hit...

by Israeli bobmbs, but the men supposedly hiding among them get away unscathed? :sarcasm:

[Leopolds Ghost]

121. Yet more example of their DEVIOUSNESS!

Trying to ape tactics we used in past guerrilla wars.

Taking advantage of the enemy being just as bloodthirsty as they are, to attempt to level the moral playing field!

Everyone knows the killing of innocents will stop ONLY when the terrorists are exterminated. Col. Kurtz said so!

[springhill]

163. Yes,

That is a very interesting and important point you make.

[cigsandcoffee]

161. I'll address the substance of your post...

...they are hiding rockets and weapons caches in civilian-heavy areas, where Israel's taking them out will do the most damage to innocents. That way, they may lose a battery of rockets, but will gain wonderful PR and support from people willing to side with oppresive fundamentalists that sacrifice their innocents in order to protect an ability to wage war against Israeli civilians. It's a masterstroke plan, really, but the only catch is that one has to be an absolute soulless scumbag to carry it out.

[The Stranger]

198. No, they aren't hatching some conspiracy to sacrifice their people for

their bombs. This is a false construction created in an attempt to justify massive civilian casualties, and it is transparent.

Someone here likes to reference Occham's Razor. The reason why they are found in villages is because they are villagers. They don't have Dimona installations or spy sattelites or even air force bases. They have villages.

Besides, even if they did hatch a conspiracy to place bombs near civilians -- presumably so that the media that doesn't cover these events would somehow decide to cover them -- what we are seing is civilians being obliterated while they are fleeing the villages. So their supposed conspiracy never would have worked in the first place.

[Bluebear]

216. .

[Roy]

17. Just curious?

Israel has all of these tanks and modern weapons why didn't they just go in and fight these guys on the ground? Especially if the so called attacks came from the Lebanese border.
It seems that they just blew past the guys they say attacked them and kidnapped their soldiers to blow up civilians and infrastructure. Hundreds of civilians lives could have been saved, and Hezbulla would be fighting soldiers instead of attacking civilians.
I hope the answer is not that they would rather kill innocent civilians with bombs instead of risking troops on the ground.
This war fighting from 10,000 feet against an enemy without so much as a kite seems to be the cowardly way.
I know I am dense on this issue, but this is a serious question.

[Leopolds Ghost]

124. You're thinking from a terrorist mindset

Everyone knows bombing from the air is the only non-cowardly way to exterminate the civilians who support Hezbollah.

As we saw in Katrina, the NEO-American way (apparently) is to get out when the authorities tell you to. Anyone who remains behind is a criminal and can be shot, drowned, etc. without remorse.

[reincarnated]

168. Well Said! n/t

[truedelphi]

174. Funny thing - i was thinking about the Katrina

similarity myself. A journalist interviewing people at a
Lebanese hospital was told by the surviving passenger of a
car that had been rocketed - "We were evacuating as the
Israelis had told us."

[Roy]

197. I guess I should have known better than enter these threads...

I'm going to assume/hope you were being facetious.

But at least you replied.
Thanks

[Igel]

202. Because a country's first obligation is to

protect its citizens.

We didn't hear Siniora or Nasrallah complaining about Hezbollah attacks on Israel. Siniora was a signora, and Allah's Help (Nasrallah) was intended to help Israeli's into the grave.

If you have the choice between bombing targets to weaken the opposition and beat them, or between sending an army in when the opposition is likely to have Kornet anti-tank rockets, RPGs, and a wide variety of other more prosaic munitions that'll kill your men, you bomb them.

War is only about proportionality when it serves your purpose; when disproportionality serves your purpose, it's the way to go. Many people have "status quo" and "stability" as their goal; proportionality makes battle equally painful on both sides, and pushes towards the status quo in an ajudgmental manner. But if Britain could have wiped out the German army in WWII without losing a single soldier or wiped out the German airforce in the Battle of Britain without losing a single plane by having wildly disproportionate forces, don't think they wouldn't have done it.

[Roy]

207. I kinda see your point.

Which makes it clear, I guess, that I will never understand what the hell is going on over there. It just seems that if the goal is to bomb to weaken the enemy, then they are failing miserably by bombing civilians in what appears to be 10 maybe 15 civilians to 1 enemy/fighter. The enemy, it seems will be left just as strong and even more emboldened and with more support to kill more Israelis.

If Hezbollah is actually the enemy and half the danger to the world as it is purported, then it would make more sense at least to me, that they would use more care to kill them instead of killing civilians.

Saying that they will kill civilians until the civilians kill Hezbollah who are killing Israelis just doesn't compute with me.

I guess I will give up trying to understand this tragic logic, but with so many innocents on both sides being killed and maimed, it just seems that the missing ingredient here is just common logic with the active ingredient being man's desire to commit genocide.

"I'm Hatfield, you're McCoy... lets do it!!"

[wakeme2008]

18. PURE BULLSHIT...

The last war fought like that was WWII..

But question is Why is Israel dropping bombs on civilians from jets. Do they have no honor.

[leftofthedial]

23. If a bank guard blasted a bunch of innocent bystanders to smithereens

to get a clear shot at the bank robber


the guard would be tried for murder

[The Magistrate]

194. Probably Not, Sir

Under common legal doctrine, any harm done to bystanders in the act of apprehending a person committing a felony is charged to the felon; thus, if a policeman shoots someone in a situation like that you have described, the robber would be charged with murder, not the officer. The presumption is that without the commission of the crime, no one would have been harmed, and therefore the responsibility rests with the perpetrator.

[Truthiness Inspector]

24. Yup

It's too bad some here can't acknowledge this point without going, "But Israel..."

If Israeli troops were intentionally using civilians as shields, I would condemn that as well. They aren't.

[Ms. Clio]

27. it wasn't "some here," it was the person selectively quoted in the OP

who mentioned Israel.

Try again.

[Truthiness Inspector]

28. Well

Do you condemn Hezbollah's use of civilians as shields? I do.

[Ms. Clio]

29. If that is occurring, then of course

Do you condemn the indiscriminate bombing of civilians? I do.

[Truthiness Inspector]

34. It is occurring

so thank you for condemning that. Of course I condemn "indiscriminate bombing of civlians" but if you are making that allegation against Israel, please support that (if in fact you are alleging that). Has Irael killed civilians? Yes, sadly, they have. But if you refer back to Hezbollah blending in with civilians to deliberately maximize the death count of Lebanese civilians, that directly addresses the charge of "indiscriminate."

[Ms. Clio]

35. I am referring to the bombing of ambulances and refugee convoys

and the levelling of entire city blocks and the use of cluster bombs.

The support for those allegations is all over LBN if you care to look for it.

It is indiscriminate slaughter.

[Truthiness Inspector]

37. I have seen those articles

What I am talking about is Hezbollah purposefully killing civilians and purposefully getting them killed. The argument that Israel has hit civilian targets doesn't speak to Israel's intent given Hezbollah's tactics, not that that is comforting to the innocents killed/injured and their families, of course.

[bigtree]

38. Hizbollah didn't direct the Israeli fire onto the civilians

While it's reprehensible that they are hiding behing the population, there is still no justification in bombing these areas from the air. The proof of that is in the innocent lives lost and the perpetuity of the Hizbollah combatants. It's a bad policy from an operational standpoint. If it isn't strategy to get at the assailants then it is nothing more than vengance against the Lebanese.

[Ms. Clio]

39. If you are trying to argue that they do not intend to hit those ambulances

then you are an example of "truthiness" indeed.

I really don't think you know the correct meaning of Colbert's word.

[Truthiness Inspector]

41. Thanks.

I could make a similar joke about your username as well, but it serves no purpose.

[Ms. Clio]

42. by all means focus on that aside instead of addressing the main point

[Truthiness Inspector]

44. I have already addressed it

Intent versus outcome.

[blonndee]

48. You don't know jack shit about Israel's intent.

You have NO way of knowing. Except for looking at the outcome, that is.

[Truthiness Inspector]

50. And you are assuming the worst about Israel's intentions

why is that?

[blonndee]

52. You also don't know jack shit about what I'm assuming.

Not everyone's "assumptions" are based entirely on their own wishes, unlike yours. Some of us are among the reality-based community.

[Truthiness Inspector]

57. What is your position?

I thought it was clear when you said it was the outcome that mattered.

[blonndee]

59. First address what I brought up and you so quickly dodged.

How can you POSSIBLY know what Israel's intent is? You can't. I would certainly hope that you wouldn't unthinkingly lap up what the corpmedia tells you to, just because you want to believe it's true. You didn't buy that whole Iraq WMD thing, did you?

[Truthiness Inspector]

66. Why are we arguing?

Hezbollah's intent is clear. As far as Israel's intent, you see what they hit as evidence of what their intentions are, not taking into account how Hezbollah operates, and I see it differently.

If Hezbollah stopped attacking Israel from behind civilian shields, we would know very, very quickly whether Israel targets civilians or not, wouldn't we?

[blonndee]

70. But you don't know that these strikes HAVE all been

targeted at sites from which Hezbollah fired. One reason I am suspicious, besides what has already occured, is the excerpted news piece below. Please take the time to read it. There is plenty of other evidence that suggests that your argument that Israel doesn't intend to kill civilians is false, but little to no evidence to suggest that it's true. THAT is what I'm taking issue with, besides my dismay that you seem not concerned much with the suffering of the Lebanese people and more concerned with assigning blame. Your OP demonstrates this, as you selectively quoted the UN representative, leaving out his condemnation of Israeli actions.

(AFP) 24 July 2006

JERUSALEM - The Israeli air force is under orders to blast 10 buildings in south Beirut, a Hezbollah stronghold, for every rocket the Shiite militant group fires at the Israeli port of Haifa, army radio said Monday.

“Army chief of staff Dan Halutz has given the order to the air force to destroy 10 multi-storey buildings in the Dahaya district (of Beirut) in response to every rocket fired on Haifa,” a senior air force officer told the station.
(...)

UN humanitarian coordinator Jan Egeland on Sunday accused Israel of violating humanitarian law as he toured bombed-out areas of south Beirut.

“This is destruction of block after block of mainly residential areas. I would say it seems to be an excessive use of force in an area with so many citizens,” he said.

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticleNew.asp?xfile...

08:16 IDF chief: For every Haifa attack, troops will strike 10 south Beirut houses (Haaretz)
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/ShTickers.html

This is from the thread http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2409402&mesg_id=2409402

[Truthiness Inspector]

77. Thanks for the discussion

And adding substance. I am not the OP, by the way. Your articles do support your argument, but considering it is an unnamed source, I'll take it with a grain of salt, and that is not meant to be rude.
You have maintained that I don't care about innocent Lebanese, and I think it's only fair that you quote me on that, because I have said no such thing.

[Ms. Clio]

80. The "IDF chief" is not an "unnamed source"

the articles fully support the assertions made.

[Truthiness Inspector]

88. It was someone else quoting him

from what I could tell from the article.

[Ms. Clio]

90. are you for real? What do journalists do, but quote people?

[Truthiness Inspector]

94. Indeed

And not always accurately, as we all well know.

[blonndee]

104. You didn't have trouble believing the part that supported your position

though, did you?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1720674&mesg_id=1721517

[Truthiness Inspector]

110. Two things

First of all, my first post on this thread was addressing some comments made by posters here, thus the "here."

Secondly, Jan Egeland's quote is a direct quote, not a "Jan said."

[Ms. Clio]

113. your first post intimated that it was "some people" who mentioned Israel

and not Egeland, in his own words in the parts of the article the OP did not choose to quote.

[Truthiness Inspector]

119. Geesh

This is exactly what I said: It's too bad some here can't acknowledge this point without going, "But Israel..."

Last time I checked, we were not at the UN, rather posting here on DU.

We all misunderstand comments at times, it's ok.

[Ms. Clio]

123. no, I don't think there are any "misunderstandings" here

I don't rely on my "gut" rather than inconvenient facts. But that is, of course, the essence of truthiness.

[Truthiness Inspector]

131. Remarkable

Truly astounding. Flabbergasting.

When you find those facts you charge me with, let me know. Until then I think I need some Head On, Apply Directly To The Forehead x 3 :::groan:::

[Ms. Clio]

135. I'm still waiting for all your links to YOUR credible facts and figures

since you know so much more than the people on the ground about the casualties, and who is "innocent" among them, and whatnot.

Perhaps the Head On will help you produce some.

[Truthiness Inspector]

142. My goodness

I have said repeatedly on this thread that I do not know who amongst the dead in Lebanon are innocents and who are Hezbollah. In fact, I have asked how others seem to know, saying I do NOT know.

[Ms. Clio]

147. no, we all seem to know that at least half of the casualties have been

women and children who cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, be anything other than "innocents." That has been reported by several reputable news sources, and if you choose to deliberately ignore the stories about those casualties, many which have been posted here, it's not my job to provide them for you.

[blonndee]

114. Wrong.

He called Israel's offensive "disproportionate" and "a violation of international humanitarian law."

Here's another direct quote from the article:

"I don't think anyone should be proud of having many more children and women dead than armed men.

"We need a cessation of hostilities because this is a war where civilians are paying the price," said Egeland as he headed to Israel.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/24072006/140/aid-chief-blasts-cowardly-hizbollah.html

When reporters use quotes, those are the exact words the person used. Besides, please do not resort to semantics. I'm sure I can find the exact transcript of his remarks, if you wish, but I think instead of that timewaster, you should acknowledge the truth of what the man said.

[Truthiness Inspector]

127. I'm not disputing Egeland's quotes

I have nowhere on this thread done so.

The quotes I did/do question were the ones attributed to the IDF Chief, which were not direct quotes, unlike the Egeland ones.

[blonndee]

129. Oh, I see.

This thread has gotten so entangled and so many disputes about "quotes," I thought you were referring to the quotes by Egeland that were omitted from the OP. :crazy: My mistake. Have you done as I suggested and joined the thread on that article? If you "question" its validity, I'd guess you want to find out more about it via discussion and reading what others have to say about it, right?

[oberliner]

133. Omitted from the OP?

They were not omitted from the OP.

The OP included a full quote excerpted from an article with a link back to the original.

And please do not imply that there was any "selective quoting".

The quote was included in its entirity and the remainder of the article is linked to for context.

It is my understanding that those are the rules about how to post here.

As per Discussion Forum Rule 5.

[blonndee]

136. EXCUSE me, YES THERE WAS

so quit trying to claim the opposite! Only those words condemning Hezbollah were chosen, not those condemning both sides, including Israel.

On edit: Here's part of what was omitted:


He called Israel's offensive "disproportionate" and "a violation of international humanitarian law."

Here's another direct quote from the article:

"I don't think anyone should be proud of having many more children and women dead than armed men.

"We need a cessation of hostilities because this is a war where civilians are paying the price," said Egeland as he headed to Israel.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/24072006/140/aid-chief-blasts-...

When reporters use quotes, those are the exact words the person used.

[Emit]

169. You can post up to four paragraphs. n/t

[blonndee]

85. The article is sound...if you want to discuss it you should

join that thread, if you're really interested in learning anything as to its validity. I'd hope that a fellow DUer would want to learn as much as possible, and not just look for things that reflect what they wish to believe. No personal attack there--I'm assuming that you honestly want to learn. I hope I'm right.

My mistake on the OP misattribution. Also, what I said was, "you seem not concerned much with the suffering of the Lebanese people and more concerned with assigning blame." Even without OP, you have spent the bulk of your effort attempting to defend the actions and assign blame.

[oberliner]

98. It was not selective quoting

Everything that the UN coordinator was quoted as saying in the article was included!

How is that selective quoting?

[blonndee]

101. Bullshit. Read the article! Good god almighty.

[Ms. Clio]

116. I don't know, I am reminded of a line by Jon Stewart

"it's like they think we are retarded."

[blonndee]

117. If they do, they're projecting.

:toast:

[Ms. Clio]

111. because you left out the parts about "disproportionate," etc.

[oberliner]

137. so what?

That wasn't part of the quote.

A short excerpt is included. The article is linked to. As per DU rules.

[blonndee]

138. Nobody said it broke any rules. I said it was selective quoting.

Which it was.

[wordpix2]

102. we DO know Hezbollah deliberately attacks civilians in Israel, though

[Ms. Clio]

109. no, we don't -- we know they fire rockets, but we can't know their intent

funny how that works.

[Leopolds Ghost]

140. Thereby justifying Tzitvi(sp?) statements that Lebanese civs are fair game

So both sides are even-steven, right? Only in the retarded moral calculations of kindergardners and Post-Newsweek columnists with kindergartem era ethics (not helped by an absence of regard for morality as a spiritual concept, always a problem when secular Americans get their ox gored and blindly follow the "rational" course of supporting whichever side their family is supporting because "deep down we're all human" (read, amoral animals... according to Richard Dawkins) "and some insults are too much to bear" (read, don't mess with MY tribe). At least, that's the vibe I get from "liberal hawks" these days.

[Ms. Clio]

53. right, they are bombing ambulances and convoys "accidentally"

there is no rational excuse or justification for it, on this or any other planet.

[Truthiness Inspector]

61. In your opinion

Which you are entitled to of course. Hezbollah only hides amongst women and children, they would never consider using an ambulance or leaving the scene in a convoy would they? Look, I'm not saying this is what happened, because I personally do not know, but it is entirely possible given Hezbollah's tactics.

One thing I'm sure we both agree on is that we'd both like all of the violence to stop.

[Ms. Clio]

63. what I know is what the pictures show

you have nothing but opinions.

[Truthiness Inspector]

69. We can both look at the same pictures

The outcome is still civilian deaths. We aren't in dispute over that. You are arguing that Israel targets civilians, I am arguing that Hezbollah is inviting strikes on these targets, as opposed to Israel having a desire to kill civilians.

[Ms. Clio]

74. that is so intellectually dishonest I am not even going to bother n/t

[wordpix2]

103. perhaps the ambulances are carrying Hezbollah soldiers

[blonndee]

105. PLEASE! I guess the mother and children that were killed

yesterday were Hezbollah soldiers. Targeting these is a war crime. Please don't be so deliberately obtuse.

[Ms. Clio]

107. yes, that's the rationale that was used in Fallujah, too n/t

[springhill]

165. Because Israel has not made a statement.........

that it intentionally bombs civilin targets means they don't? Hmmm, I think actions always speak louder than words.

[KitSileya]

189. Isn't an intent to bomb 10 houses for every Israeli house destroyed

an intent to bomb civilian targets? How can they know 10 hizbollah sites for every missile fired on Israel? I don't know how many missiles hizbollah has fired, but I doubt they have 10xmissiles fired number of sites.

If I understand you correctly, however, you are speaking sarcastically, and feel that Israel shows their intent to bomb civilian targets by the fact that they have bombed civilian targets - in essence, we agree.

As for the conflict in general, I have found that because I have been told by friends and family how the Israeli have treated the Palestinians, I cannot seem not to distrust Israel in this conflict as well. I am biased, and have trouble being ojective on Israel's behalf. I am a fellow Norwegian og Egeland's tho', and from what I've read and seen, he seems to be very smart and level-headed, who's not afraid to tell the truth, even if the US doesn't like it. As you can read from the article, he criticizes both sides of the conflict.

[bigtree]

36. The Hizbollah combatants leave the areas that the launch missiles from

the airstrikes aren't getting to them. The airstrikes that returned fire to these areas inhabited by innocent civilians were reprehensible. The Israelis must have known that the attackers were long gone. Everyone else does. That's what makes these reprisals against the civilians who are left in these populated areas look like nothing but revenge. They are not a deterrent. There can be no expectation of the women and children caught in the way of these bloody reprisals to stop the Hizbollah militants. There can be no expectation that their deaths will deter anything. That's what makes the attacks despicable.

What purpose is there in firing into these populated areas where the combatants have clearly fled? What is the result? Has that action made Israel more secure, stopped the attacks? Have the actions made the population any more able to themselves stop Hizbollah militants from firing on Israel?

[Truthiness Inspector]

40. I don't think that is fair

So what is Israel to do? Hezbollah is the one using deplorable tactics. Hezbollah is to blame for excessive civilian deaths for drawing a bullseye on any given civilian populated location from which they launch missiles.

If Hezbollah stopped this, the counterstrikes would stop.

[Ms. Clio]

43. so ONLY Hezbollah is using "deplorable tactics"

That's not what the UN guy said, is it?

[bigtree]

45. Ground operations. The Lebanese forces must be bolstered

not just lip service. The Lebanese govt. already signalled a willingness to do this, but they are just not up to the task.

You just won't admit it. The 'counterstrikes' into the civilian areas are counterproductive and ineffective. They are also against international law. There is also the issue of Israel telling the residents to flee and then killing them on the roads out, destroying all of the other transportation. This is no deterrence, it's a misguided reprisal. It's a weak pacifier to point to what the Hizbollah militants are doing. I don't expect they're thinking much about the fate of the Lebanese who've been killed, except perhaps to stir up more animosity toward Israel. That's the effect. Israel is blamed and Hizbollah gets to stand as the only buffer against the ones who are killing the Lebanese. That's amazingly bad policy. It's reprehensible if it's designed to do anything more than hit Hizbollah militants. That's been a failure. The attacks are continuing despite the deaths of these civilians.

[Truthiness Inspector]

49. Point of agreement, somewhat

The Lebanese government must help to push Hezbollah out.

[bigtree]

51. but you copped out on Israel's responsibility for their actions

[Ms. Clio]

54. denial is a powerful drug

[blonndee]

55. I don't think it's actual "denial."

I think it's willful deception, strawmen, and red herrings. Not one of these arguments has been intellectually honest.

[Ms. Clio]

64. that has certainly occurred to me, too n/t

[blonndee]

67. On second thought

maybe you're right. All of those could be symptomatic of denial.

That's actually a more cheering thought. I'm about to cry, thinking that people who consider themselves liberal are cheering this on. I'm hoping they are just in denial. Then maybe there's hope. :cry: I think I'm going to need therapy pretty soon, myself.

[Ms. Clio]

73. okay, let's go with that for now

:)

Hang in there! People can fool themselves about so many things -- just remember all the incomprehensibly stupid Americans who still love their Chimperor and think he's a good Christian man.

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

:hug:

[wordpix2]

108. hey, DU, can we agree the parties need to stop warring and sit down with

third parties and try to work out their differences with words and agreements, not bombs?

I find it ironic that the issues are things like land and water --- yet both parties are destroying the land and water, not to mention infrastructure that allows a good economy to flourish.

[blonndee]

112. You were just stirring up the rah-rah war rhetoric before in other

threads and perhaps this one...they've all become a blur at this point.

I have no desire to continue to fight, but you should really consider toning down your own discussion if you want to find common ground with other DUers.

On that note, peace.

[Name removed]

126. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[blonndee]

128. So much for discussion. I have never

defended Hezbollah, nor do I need educating as to their goals. My objection is to Israel's actions and to intellectually dishonest arguments. Had you read any of my posts at all, you would understand this.

That's kind of what I expected when you offered up a discussion. I am disappointed, though.

[Ms. Clio]

143. you are offering those pictures as sources??? Unbelievable

I wish somebody would find me that picture of Bush standing in front of a row of flags making that precise arm gesture to a crowd of people.

[Scurrilous]

167. Here you go:

And another:

[Ms. Clio]

203. thank you so much!

I really appreciate that, and the second picture is an extra special bonus. I'd seen it before, but wasn't thinking of it.

:yourock:

[truedelphi]

175. After all, if we need to destroy all civilian areas where

Terrorists are out and about, Israel with its Hammas suicide bombers
should be levelled as well. For if those suicide bombers are operating
there, it must be that every man woman and child in Israel wants them
there...

Today Israel takes out Lebannon. Tomorrow the Powers that be take out
the Blue States right in our own back yard.

[Truthiness Inspector]

56. I don't think I have at all

We don't agree that Israel targeted civilians on purpose.
We DO agree that Israel has killed innocent civilians, however - as has Hezbollah.

[bigtree]

60. they targeted areas where they knew civilians were

that's enough for rebuke

[Truthiness Inspector]

62. And where Hezbollah is attacking Israel from. n/t

[bigtree]

68. Again, the attackers don't remain in position waiting for return fire

These sorties have been carried out long after the attackers exit the scene. It doesn't make sense that these reprisals into populated areas will deter or stop the attacks since the only ones affected in any significant numbers are the Lebanese civilians who have nothing at all to do with Hizbollah. They elected a government that our president claims to support. The citizens killed have no way of stopping the attacks on Israel. They have even less capacity now that their infrastructure has been destroyed. They are helpless. They don't deserve to be at the point of Israel's reprisals.

Did you come up with an answer for what result the Israelis expect from firing into these populated areas after the combatants have exited the scene?

[Truthiness Inspector]

72. No I haven't

Because you are asking me to operate on the assumption that all of those killed in Lebanon have been innocents. Do you know the percentage of innocents versus Hezbollah amongst the dead, and if so, how were they identified? I am not disputing that innocents have been killed, I am just asking you how you know all Hezbollah members leave before being killed.

And that gets back to the original issue, why is Hezbollah using civilian shields in the first place? I really don't want to argue about this all night. There comes a point when it becomes clear that we could spend eternity going around and around, with no productive result.

[blonndee]

76. You don't know that they are. Please read and respond to my post

above. Thank you.

[bigtree]

79. now you are leaving the planet of reality

do you really think they sit there among those who were ultimately slaughtered in the airstrikes, 350 plus, and wait for return fire? That's the same naivete that likely has you believing that the strikes are 'pinpointed' to the exact spot of the rocket launch. Watch a little more of the reports TI. No one who is reporting anything of this is asserting that there were any more than a handful of Hizbollah killed among the 350 plus.

[Ms. Clio]

83. no the subtext is that the Lebanese civilians aren't really "innocent"

perhaps, as Juan Cole suggests, not even quite human.

[Truthiness Inspector]

86. Excuse me?

I have clearly differentiated between innocent Lebanese and Hezbollah. What a cheap shot, and not the first one either on this thread. I, on the other hand, have not attributed to you bigotry based on your position in this matter. You are scraping the bottom now.

[Ms. Clio]

91. hey, just my opinion, which is based on what you actually write

and not the imaginary facts floating in your head.

[Truthiness Inspector]

93. Then quote me n/t

[Ms. Clio]

96. no, why should I, you never quote anybody or anything

sorry, not playing.

[Truthiness Inspector]

106. Wow

Instead of admitting that you were wrong to suggest I don't care about Lebanese civilians and even that I consider these civilians "not human," you cop out of quoting me when you realize you can't.

That is really sad, and I mean sad in the truest sense of the word. It accomplishes nothing, except to create division.

[Truthiness Inspector]

84. Look

How are Hezbollah members properly and independently verified? By Hezbollah?

They know that high civilian deaths are advantageous to them, so what would motivate them to identify the dead as Hezbollah instead of innocent civilians? I'm being serious here.

[bigtree]

87. this is not a country which has a closed press

there have been ZERO reports suggesting that any more than a handful of those slaughtered were Hizbollah militants. If you want to invent a story that contradicts that you are free to do so . . . and back it up with proof.

seriously

[Truthiness Inspector]

89. I asked a fair question

Do you not agree?

[bigtree]

92. It doesn't appear that there is any evidence bearing your hypothesis out

if you have some . . . otherwise, the reports so far say that only a handful of the 350 plus killed were Hizbollah combatants. I've been following events rather closely.

[Truthiness Inspector]

95. Read the OP again

and consider my very fair question in light of that.

[bigtree]

97. Hizbollah is not making the determinations about who was killed

so, I don't think your question has any chance of finding validity in the notion that significant numbers of Hizbollah have been killed. Not even the Israelis are asserting this.

[bigtree]

99. this is redundant

goodnite TI

[Truthiness Inspector]

115. In other words there is no way of knowing

I raised the very valid question of identification, and subsequent classifications of those killed. I never said "significant numbers," by the way. In fact, I clearly said I do not know, but the question I raised must be considered.

[bigtree]

122. that's dishonest. The residents know. You must believe they are liars

the families know . . .

goddamn your insensitivity. I've never questioned the affiliation of the Israeli dead.

[Ms. Clio]

125. incredible, isn't it?

I guess the Iraqis don't know who has died, either.

[Truthiness Inspector]

134. Here we go again

I asked a very valid question. I've already said I don't have the answer, and frankly, neither do you.

[Ms. Clio]

145. Nobody with a shred of credibility disputes the casualty figures

guess that just leaves you.

[Truthiness Inspector]

148. Good night

Nobody is disputing casualty figures, but it is clear that my valid question disturbs you. It's late and I have to go to bed. I'll check back tomorrow night.

[oberliner]

153. Number of Hezbollah casualties disputed by Israel

This AP story includes the following excerpt about halfway down:

Hezbollah released no casualty figures. It has claimed 11 dead in the entire campaign, though Israel says it has killed more than 100 of its fighters.

<End of excerpt>

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060725/ap_on_re_mi_ea/lebanon_israel_398

Here is the excerpt in the context of the paragraph before and after it:

"Backed by an intense artillery barrage, troops seized a hilltop inside the town, but the rest of Bint Jbail remained in the hands of up to 200 Hezbollah guerrillas, military officials said.

An Israeli tank was hit by Hezbollah fire, they said. Hezbollah released no casualty figures. It has claimed 11 dead in the entire campaign, though Israel says it has killed more than 100 of its fighters.

A day earlier, a Red Cross doctor visited Bint Jbail and reported an unknown number of families hunkered down in schools and mosques for protection, though much of the population of about 30,000 had fled."

[bigtree]

156. I'll say this

There have to be a greater number of these fighters in these remote targets that the article says are now the focus of much of Israel's strikes. I think that's where the majority of the militant deaths have occured, but I don't have anything confirming that.

That said, given the number provided, 384 Lebanese dead, that still leaves nearly 300 Lebanese who are not identified by the Israeli military as Hizbollah militants who have been slaughtered by the Israeli reprisals. I still think this is a barbaric way to prosecute their defense, despite the fact that some who were identified as 'fighters' were reported killed along with reports of the civilians.

It would be rather incredible if the Israelis were to claim the bulk of these 100 were primarily among the civilians. 100 fighters launching rockets from these areas? Remember, the only remotely credible excuse they have for firing into populated areas is in immediate defense of life.

[Leopolds Ghost]

149. Is Truthiness Inspector aware that the Katyushas aren't in Beirut?

Neither are the longer range missiles -- except for ship to shore -- Beirut's not in striking distance of anywhere in Israel.

[eyl]

184. Hizbullah

storage and HQ facilities are located (in part) in Beirut, however.

[Leopolds Ghost]

144. Sealing the roads after the residents have been told to leave

To prevent the "criminal element" and "bitter enders" from leaving.

Sound familiar? It should. Like a cretain other military operation
(complete with Israeli and South African mercs) close to home. In the US.

You think global security industry don't train for this and go to symposiums to debate the merits of this and similar tactics for
"controlling a hostile civilian population"? They most certainly do.

This particular invasion is a test case for the latest roll-out in
American and Israeli security concepts, coming soon to a disaster zone
or a failed state near you. The fighting will end when the data is in.

[blonndee]

146. Now that is one scary fucking thought.

Are you serious?

[Leopolds Ghost]

141. They are using tactics the Romans used against the Zealots in 70

and vice versa. Oh the (sad) irony.

[Leopolds Ghost]

130. If Israel bombs a 13-story hirise, how is it morally differ from McVeigh?

Answer it does not. Bombing civilian populations from the air is just as cowardly as using human shields. Bombing high-rises from the air is an act of terrorism in the US and a war crime abroad -- until we did it in Tokyo and Dresden. Before that only Hitler did it. It's how he got his reputation for brutality years before the war ended and the Holocaust was discovered. Bombing cities from the air is an unspeakable war crime, as Robert McNamara recently admitted.

[Leopolds Ghost]

132. Need a cite? Read the New York Times, Truthiness Inspector.

Israeli Foreign minister said on page A1 last week that civilians were fair game.

I can't help it if you don't have access to the Times. I read it in print. What do you rely on, Newsweek?

[Truthiness Inspector]

139. Link it if you have it

I could always subscribe online to read the article.

[Leopolds Ghost]

155. NYT being a newspaper, I don't get it online.

If you prefer to look it up online, be my guest. Last week, page A1, title mentions something about ground invasion. It is a throwaway quote by the Foreign Minister, one of the primary sources for the article. One sentence. Reporter glosses over it without comment or follow-up. The Minister is explicit, however, in saying civilians in the area who sympathize with Hezbollah are fair game.

[Missy M]

25. When Jan Egeland states "I heard they were proud, etc."....

(meaning Hezbollah) he doesn't say who he heard this from. He should at least say who he heard it from, was it Hezbollah.

[bigtree]

31. the leader proclaimed that "we are unharmed"

I think that was the quote, widely reported

[slaveplanet]

26. Perhaps Mr Egeland should

call for them to all put their pistols to their own heads and pull the trigger?

It would be about the same effect as if they all came out in the open to face all the various uranium munitions of the Israeli army.

[blonndee]

30. Omitted: "He called Israel's offensive 'disproportionate' and

'a violation of international humanitarian law.'

Also omitted:

Mr Egelund condemned the killing and wounding of civilians by both
sides.

And:

"We need a cessation of hostilities because this is a war where civilians are paying the price," said Egeland as he headed to Israel.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/24072006/140/aid-chief-blasts-cowardly-hizbollah.html

[Beausoir]

150. Of course! But this thread is only for the screaming banshees!

He is a reasonable person. No ONE has an answer for this.

This entire thread has degenerated into a personal flame war that should be carried out via the Personal Message system.

[blonndee]

152. Well

I guess I'm among the screaming banshees since I had several extended conversations on this thread. :) I didn't think it was a flame-war. Maybe an argument that was a waste of time. Some of us are too stubborn, I guess. I just can't stand misrepresentation and dishonest argument. I should have learned those arguments usually don't magically become reasonable.

[pitohui]

32. yeah well they ain't gonna stop because they were asked nicely

they are cowards shielding themselves w. the bodies of the helpless, so what do you do, it's a hard choice, but obviously they can't be rewarded for this behavior by being allowed to skate

so what do you do?

[bigtree]

33. those 'helpless'

what do they become as they are killed?

The combatants leave the areas they fire from before the missiles get there. How does taking the lives of the civilians left in these areas punish the attackers?

[pitohui]

65. presumably it makes them less willing to tolerate their presence

after a certain point if you house and feed the enemy you are yourself the enemy

if a man commits murder and i allow him to stay in my house for a few days i am charged as an accessory

i think this is the rationale and it doesn't seem entirely illogical to me

we invaded afghanistan after mullah omar housed and fed and took money from osama bin laden for 5 years, allowing him to have training camps etc. for the men who attacked us, same logic, i don't see how we can stand all high and mighty and criticize when we would do the very same

[bigtree]

71. The Lebanese voted en masse for the Lebanese government

not for Hizbollah. I don't know what you mean by tolerate but we tolerate Bush without expecting attacks from those who our country illegally and immorally bombs and kills across sovereign borders.

Do you really think the elderly, the children, the women and men who were killed were in a position to push Hizbollah from Lebanon? It doesn't appear that their deaths have had any impact at all on what Hizbollah is doing. By your logic, the killings are vengance, punishment. That's misguided and wrong.

I think all of the militarization in Afghanistan is flawed the same. Every one there killed who identifies themselves or is identified by our govt. as Taliban is also said to support al-Qaeda*, but they are summarily executed no matter what proof there is of that. All the govt. and military do to justify it is call them insurgents or Taliban, without proff of their complicity or guilt in anything. These actions are alienating the population our govt. pretends to be defending.

I criticize all of the actions for their bloody overreach.

[Ms. Clio]

82. exactly n/t

[Leopolds Ghost]

151. I could apply the same standard to New Orleans. The military did.

With respect to criminals (both the hard core kind and the refused-to-abandon-their-property-to-federal-siezure kind.) It's a shame the criminals hid behind those innocent starving people, it's their fault no one was allowed out on foot and the city was left to rot and burn. The blood of countless Katrina deaths are on the hands of the large criminal underclass of New Orleans... by the same reasoning you enunciated.

[KitSileya]

190. To be slightly facetious,

I'll remember that when Bushco is sentenced in The Hague for war crimes against the Iraqi people. I mean, you Americans not only let him become president, you did it twice! Every American, in other words, is an accessory to murder and should be punished accordingly. What, you didn't have the power to stop him? Well, the Lebanese government didn't have the power to stop Hisbollah, and have in fact asked for help to do so, which is more than a huge majority of Americans did when it came to the Iraqi War. Or Afghanistan. Or Iran. Or Chile. Or Nicaragua. Or the multitude of other places where US governments have overturned democratically elected governments to install their own puppets.

[Cleita]

120. Hiding among women and children is nothing new with

terrorists. The IRA did it in Ireland and England. In our own country, remember the Symbionese Liberation Army? The ones who kidnapped Patty Hearst? They had a method of setting up safe houses in poor inner city neighborhood. So when they ended up in S. Central L. A., the tear gas cannisters the police shot into a deteriorating home set it on fire barbequeing those who were in the house. Imagine if they shot rockets and heavy artillery in there? How would the houses nearby had fared or the traffic in the street.

[Leopolds Ghost]

154. AND NOW, A Lesson In How NOT To Be Seen.

Mr. Nasrallah, from Finchley, will give us a lesson in how NOT to be seen. Mr. Nasrallah?

*BOOM*

We have our first lesson in how NOT to be seen: Don't Stand Up.

Mr. Fouad, a Lebanese civilian who supports Hezbollah, has clearly learned the first lesson in how NOT to be seen. Mr. Fouad? Yoo Hoo!

As you can see, he is well-concealed behind two apartment blocks. Unfortunately, he has picked a very obvious hiding place.

*BOOM* *BOOM*

[Czolgosz]

157. Agreed. Hezbollah should stand out in the open.

[killbotfactory]

158. I agree.

So why is Israel bombing residential areas where Hezbollah doesn't operate?

[Douglas Carpenter]

159. it's terrible..but the IDF uses children as human shields in the occupied

occupied territories. And they do it quite regularly..

this from the very good people at B'Tselem - The Israeli Information Center on Human rights in the Occupied Territories:


link:

http://www.btselem.org/english/Human_Shields/20060720_Human_Shields_in_Beit_Hanun.asp

"The three who were kept in the building were two of her sons, Hazem, 14, and Qusay, 16, and her nephew, Khaled, 23. The three were taken to the staircase, at the entrance to the third-floor apartment, where the soldiers were located. The three sat there until around 8:00 P.M, about 45 minutes before the soldiers left the building. During this time, soldiers inside and outside the building were engaged in exchanges of gunfire with armed Palestinians. The staircase was not in the direct line of gunfire. Just before the end of the incident, the soldiers ordered the three to go downstairs, in front of them, to the entrance of the building. "

[Clarkie1]

166. NOMINATED! nt

[Hissyspit]

178. BOTH Israel AND Hezbollah are in violation of International Humanitarian

LAW That is what Mr. Egeland said and he called on them BOTH to stop violating those laws.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1715309&mesg_id=1724207

I see that my post this morning was ignored and this post, which only PARTIALLY quotes what Mr. Egeland said - he chastised Hezbollah AND Israel in the SAME interview, is on the Greatest Page.

[mhatrw]

179. Women & children must stop their cowardly blending among

exploding bombs.

[malaise]

181. Were women and children hiding in the banks that were bombed

yesterday. Were they on the roads, highways, bridges that were bombed.

[annabanana]

183. maybe the hezbollah are living at home, with women & children?

n/t

[warrens]

195. Cool. Let's give them billions in military aid and the latest war toys

Make it a fair fight.