Another war.... another blow to the innocents.....
Rookie
Another war.... another blow to the innocents.....
John Buffum was the man.
UCP's most violent member; a lump of destructive energy.
'64
That's just wrong.Originally Posted by aNOBLEman
I don't think you could ever successfully argue that the reason that the USA didn't "win" those conflicts was because they decided that killing civilians was bad press.
Just because the USA hasn't managed any "successful" campaigns whilst not killing civilians, doesn't mean that others haven't been able to.
And lets face it, if you can piss that many people off by having 1 stray cruise missile hitting a market, imagine the uproar if that was par for the course with the USA.
You'd now be at war with just about every country in the Mid-East, and I belive that the wholesale slaughter of any and all people of a specific race or religion that you don't agree with is called "genocide".
Thanks for all the fish
Fanatic
That's sort of how WW2 started.
Faster, faster, faster, until the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death...
– Hunter Thompson
'64
Also, it is important to note that while the Allies did bomb the crap out of German & Japanese cities towards the end of WWII, the Germans and Japanese were already on their way to defeat; the mass bombing didn't achieve a huge ammount militarily, and it didn't cause a drop in morale of the population, leading to public pressure for surrender. (Rather unsurprising, as how Britian was in a very good position to see how large-scale bombing didn't really work, having suffered the same.)
Also, the Germans and Japanese also killed a lot of civilians, and they didn't win, so I don't really think there is a conclusive link between the two.
Thanks for all the fish
Member
No it didnt, it was because the invasion of poland...
Fanatic
As well as the murder of thousands and thousands of Jewish civilians.
Faster, faster, faster, until the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death...
– Hunter Thompson
For Great Justice.
The murder of Jewish civilians was not actually found out about (There were rumours) until mid-way through the war.
The German Invasion of Poland, which had signed an agreement with the United Kingdom regarding such an attack, was the catalyst.
Is there some Geneva convention which forbids the bombing of civilian targets when there is no known link between them and an opposing force, save for a powerstation powering the grid that Hezbollah HQ is on?
<cough> www.charginmahlazer.tumblr.com </cough>
Enthusiast
i would like to share some ideas
Yes i am lebanese and yes i am against Israel
no body outside the arab world knows what Hezb Allah is..
Hezb allah is not a group of terrorist people what they are is Lebanese people that are fighting for their country.If u think about it this organisation wasnt created until Israel was trying to conquer leabanon 30 years ago and if it wasnt for hezb allah(wich i repeat is just a group of leabnese that got together and created this group in order to get Israel out of lebanon and they suceeded after many years of mar and it finaly came to an end in 2000) Some of u will say this is not their job and that is the lebanese army job. but the truth is that the army cant do anything about it.Yes Hezb Allah(wich mean the group that serv God) do get suplies from iran and seria because they do not have the ability to make good weapons that as u can see can only cause minor damage.
and some of u will say that it all started because Hezb Allah started it all by kidnaping 2 israely soldier but what about lebanese prisoner that have been prisoned in israel for 30 years what about them dont they have the right to be released???Are ony israel people considered as people that have rights. the plane was to kidnape those 2 soldiers in order to trade with lebanese prisoners in israel.
And for u who think Israel Is gona finish HezbAllah thats just a dream and what said befor explains why(BEcause HEzballah is lebanon it is every single libanese that has the right to be free) ANd i personaly see no short solution i do see a big problem to Israel with what its doing both contry will pay for what what is happening and if other country such as Amercia and britain decideds to get involeved i personaly see it will only lead to a WW3
one more thing to add..i would like to say that nobody has the right to come and say that its hezballah that started it all because if u go back to history it all started when juwish people stole a land in palastine to make it their own so they r the one who srated it all... but what happened happened and war in the middle east will never stop untill israel gets out of oure home land... IF America loves israel so much and keep on saying that israel have the right to live in peace why dont they give them a land in their contry and then im sure that all the crisis that is happening in the midle east will stop
Last edited by white devil; 07-16-2006 at 04:31 AM.
Enthusiast
in lebanon 93 dead 262 injured
in Israel around 15 dead some 12 injured so u can see the difference
can sombody add a pole that says(who do u support Israel or lebanon in what is happening) i would like to see peoples opinion outside lebanon THX
Last edited by white devil; 07-16-2006 at 04:22 AM.
Fanatic
white devil, I agree with you, in a sense, after more looking into it etc.
It would be naive to believe the Lebanese government could disarm and disband Hezbollah with little effort or consequence...if only they wanted to. I don't, at all, consider it naive hold the government of a sovereign state responsible for repeated attacks against a neighbor from within its borders.
We are not talking about shadowy terrorists who are on the run as much from the Lebanese authorities as they are from the Israelis. This was not the first time Hezbollah has attacked Israel from within the borders of Lebanon. Hezbollah is a recognized and established entity within Lebanon. Not only is it not on the lam, it has representation within the government.
To dismiss the issue of holding the Lebanese government responsible in this matter is to dismiss a very important point:
Unless one believes Israel should simply endure Hezbollah rocket attacks staged within the borders of Lebanon...then the extent to which the Lebanese government can be held responsible for activities within its borders will figure quite prominently in determining the appropriateness of Israel's response.
The government of a state clearly has responsibilities for the activities occurring within its borders. Should those activities represent an attack on neighboring countries the government has either explicitly or implicitly declared war, or is responsible for putting a stop to the attacks. The extent to which it is willing and able to halt the attacks will greatly influence the response of the nation under attack. If there was any reason to believe that the Lebanese government was willing to attempt to at least restrain Hezbollah, Israel would be required, at least by world opinion...to allow them the chance. Since the Lebanese government has shown no such inclination, what option does Israel have but to take the matter into its own hands?
Under this sort of situation... a government can only be said to not be responsible for the attacks if it is doing something to stop them. If it will not, then it is, for all intents and purposes culpable, and if it can not, it probably doesn't merit the designation of government.
Freeing the entity that is being called the Lebanese government from responsibility for these attacks but still granting it the status of the official government of a sovereign state unfairly restricts Israel's options and places it in a no-win situation:
The Lebanese Government is not about to sanction Israel's military response nor ask Israel to help it rid Lebanon of Hezbollah.
The Lebanese Government is unable (and possibly unwilling) to attempt to stop Hezbollah.
Given these two conditions, Israel's military actions cannot be considered defense against acts of war, but can be considered acts of war in themselves.
Within the context of world opinion this would seem to require Israel to either endure the attacks without reprisal or wait for the Lebanese government to grow strong enough to disband Hezbollah or ask another country provide them with the military support necessary to disband Hezbollah. The former isn't about to happen anytime soon and if Lebanon would ever have considered the latter, given their experience with Syria, it will be a long long time before they ever do again.
Thus the only two (theoretically) possible choices Israel has are endure the attacks or take action on their own. From a practical standpoint they have had only one choice.
I have no confidence, on a USA note, at all that they will be able to eliminate the threat of Hezbollah with any sort of finality...and I have little doubt that by taking the only choice they have, the region will be further destabilized and peace that much farther away. Iran and Syria will have won this battle. It can be hoped that if nothing else, this crisis will make it that much more clear that Iran and Syria are our enemies, and not simply unfriendly nations with whom we only need to talk so we we can clear up any unfortunate misunderstanding and everything will be A-OK.
Member
That's such a stupid thing to say. Remember the holacaust? wich was an important factor in the creation of Israel anyway. Not to metion the Cold war as a result of Russia's losses and resulting fear.
I agree with you about over-media exposure and/or emphasis on the war and more specificly civilians is too much, but i think you could have said it better.
And Dino I completly agree with your last post, spot on.
< 1 - 2 - to the bass >
Enthusiast
You can not use "back then" because if we could, we could say the vikings and mongols pillaged everwhere they annexed. It was acceptable abck then, definately not now. For such a militarily abled nation such as Israel to blatantly attack civilian targets is an abomonation. Hesbola ≠ Lebanese civilians. How can anyone say "go Israel" is beyond the scope of what I can believe.
Fanatic
I don't know what thread to say this in cause theres three so here it goes...
How many Israeli civilians would the Hezbollah kill if they had a chance? all of them right? Now how many civilians does Israel want to kill? None really.
So sure you can look at the stats and say omg Israel is evil but if the Hezbollah was a little more well armed i think your opinions would be much different, because there would be alot more civilian deaths on Israels side.
Enthusiast
The red sign means "does not equal to".
Meaning because the Hezb-Allah attacks you, does not mean you should attack civilians that, for 99% of the part, have nothign to do with the organization.
Fanatic
They don't want too attack civilians, the hezbollah DOES and they fire from crowds of civilians drawing fire.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote