TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Breaking News: Isreal and Lebanon at War?
Pages (54): « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 »

quote:

Originally posted by Dervish Attack my logic. Don't attack me.

you are anti-semeic now

So are a lot of other people, no countries even, given that the people who voted basically agreed with me (even the ones who abstained really, they are just playing politics).

quote:

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The United States on Thursday vetoed a U.N. Security Council resolution put forward by Qatar on behalf of Arab states that would have condemned Israel's two-week military incursion into Gaza. The vote on the draft resolution was 10-1, with the United States voting no, and four countries abstaining -- Britain, Denmark, Peru and Slovakia.

>LINK<

Though this relates to Gaza the principle is the same.

Dude this is really fucked up.....

Both sides need to take a time out and just chill.

I will not put my two cents in this, but I feel for the TA's that are directly affected, not you people like me, who live 1000s of miles away in the comfort of the West.

Apparently the Palestinians and Israelis were right on the cusp of a major unity agreement too, which just makes this all the more frustrating...

quote:

July 13, 2006 Pierre M. Atlas Palestinians undermine chance for peace -- again Last month I was in Israel, along with 21 other American academics who study the Middle East, participating in a 12-day workshop on the Arab-Israeli conflict sponsored by Tel Aviv University. On the evening of June 24 we were in Haifa, meeting with a high-ranking member of the largest Palestinian faction, Fatah. He enthusiastically declared that Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh were on the verge of signing a "unity agreement" that might jumpstart negotiations between the Palestinians and Israel. "This will be a new era, with more promise," he predicted. But the next morning, Israeli army Cpl. Gilad Shalit was kidnapped in a Palestinian raid that killed two other soldiers. Any hope for the unity agreement or renewed negotiations instantly evaporated. The Fatah official briefed us as academics, and he asked not to be identified by name. Born in a refugee camp, he is a member of the younger generation of Palestinian insiders. He became fluent in Hebrew while serving 12 years in an Israeli jail. For the past decade he has been a Palestine Liberation Organization negotiator with Israel. "I really believe peace is possible," he told us, "not because we will fall in love with the Israelis, but because there is no other way." He was plugged into the ongoing Fatah-Hamas negotiations, and that evening in Haifa he outlined the major points of the pending agreement. The Hamas government would empower President Abbas, the leader of Fatah, to negotiate with Israel in the name of the Palestinian Authority. Hamas would accept the Arab League's 2002 proposal to recognize Israel and declare an end of conflict should Israel withdraw from Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and would recognize all United Nations resolutions, including Security Council Resolution 242. The Palestinians would declare that their "right to struggle" applied only to the territories captured in 1967 and not to Israel within the Green Line. When we went to bed that night, all of us Americans were looking forward to reading the news of this breakthrough agreement in the papers the next morning. We hoped to see evidence that the realities of governance had forced Hamas to moderate its anti-Israel positions. Instead, the headlines were of the raid by three militant Palestinian factions, including members of Hamas' "military wing," and the capture of the Israeli soldier. Soon the stories were about the Israeli army incursions into Gaza to get him back. The Hamas-Fatah unity agreement never came to be. We learned that the raid into Israel was launched with the explicit intent of kidnapping an Israeli soldier. It was ordered by Khaled Mashal, the Hamas leader based in Damascus, Syria. With this act, the Hamas hardliners in Damascus and in Gaza succeeded in undermining the apparently more pragmatic leadership of Prime Minister Haniyeh. An Israeli military response was not only anticipated, I believe it was the goal of these "spoilers," who wanted to kill any agreement that might have led to a breakthrough in negotiations with Israel. The Israeli incursions into Gaza are not just about rescuing Shalit. The operation also is designed to halt the firing of Qassam rockets from Gaza into Israel. These cheap and inaccurate weapons have a short range, but regularly hit the Israeli town of Sderot across the border from Gaza. Palestinian rocket fire into Israel has increased dramatically since Israel withdrew from the Gaza strip last summer. Rather than seizing the opportunity to build a nascent Palestinian state in Gaza, the militants have used this liberated territory as a launching pad for attacks. The kidnapping of the soldier was the last straw for Israel, which has responded with intense -- and arguably disproportionate -- force. But these retaliations were provoked by the actions of Palestinian militant factions. On that evening in June when the future looked far more promising, the Fatah representative denounced the Qassams. "We call these the most expensive rockets," he said, "because of what they cost us in retaliation. We call them 'stupid rockets.' " Atlas is assistant professor of political science and director of the Franciscan Center for Global Studies at Marian College.

>>Source<<

Has anyone asked this question however, Israel is pretty assured that Iran is behind this, so why haven't they attacked Syria and Iran if their spokespersons and Ambassador is saying Syria and Iran are behind these Hezbollah actions. All I see is a nation in Lebanon that has a pisspoor military capability being attacked because of Hezbollah.

I am someone who believes Israel has a right to defend itself but something rubs me the wrong way to hear of dead families in Lebanon that are not connected to Hezbollah paying the price. This is madness to say the least. The only immediate other step that will escalate this is if ground troops from the IDF enter Lebanon or more rockets into large Israeli ciities we shall see.

quote:

Originally posted by Dervish Who is it punishing? Civilians mainly I would say. It is trying to incite fear to change their view. To terrorize them in other words.

so you would say. so? even al-jazeera says that lebanese civilians have been hurt during the IDF's attacks on Hezbollah targets.

quote:

Originally posted by Purple America is instigating all this.

I highly doubt this Purple the last thing the U.S. needs is a regional conflict with its troops there. Only mad policy makers would relish such a scenario given that little Iraq thing. This may be an Israeli, Palestinian, Hezbollah, Syria, Iran thing but a U.S. neh, last thing they need in present conditions.

quote:

Originally posted by NYCTrancefan Has anyone asked this question however, Israel is pretty assured that Iran is behind this, so why haven't they attacked Syria and Iran if their spokespersons and Ambassador is saying Syria and Iran are behind these Hezbollah actions. All I see is a nation in Lebanon that has a pisspoor military capability being attacked because of Hezbollah.

going on the assumption that the hezbollah are indeed the lebanese government, or at least a part of it (i'm not interested enough to verify that fact), let's see what you just wrote there with some word replacement:

Has anyone asked this question however, Israel is pretty assured that Iran is behind this, so why haven't they attacked Syria and Iran if their spokespersons and Ambassador is saying Syria and Iran are behind these actions of the Lebanese government. All I see is a nation in Lebanon that has a pisspoor military capability being attacked because of it's own government.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN firstly, youve totally misread what tathi was saying. he wasnt insinuating that israel have the moral authority, more that they grasp at it in the whole "terrorism" context.

I didn't . I know exactly where tathi stands. I know he doesn't approve of any attrocities and injustices suffered by eigther side. What pissed me off was the wording, "how does Israel expect to maintain the moral high ground when it's actions are as bad as Hamas?" I know he doesn't think Israel is or was on any type of moral high ground. It's the kind of language used in political discourse, specifically in this conflict, that makes me sick. And I'm not attributing that to tathi at all. Which is why I said:

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z I apologize in advance tathi if you took any offence to that, I'm obviously not trying to target you in any way.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN secondly, debating the whole root causes and effects of 1949 is pointless and irrelevant bullshit.

That the most illogical statement I've ever heard from you. Ofcourse the root cause of a problem is relevant to the problem. Are you on crack?

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN as you yourself have said, no side should be eliminated. israel is there to stay. the sooner the militant palestinians accept this the better for everyone. i mean seriously, is this how they wish to reward israel's withdrawals?

I never said that the state of Israel itself should never be dismantled (no, that doesn't mean war or nuking them or some crap like that). They certainly have no right to get rid of the indigenous population and make it a country exclusively for themselves. That also doesn't mean that I think they have to pack up their shit and leave eigther. The have to co-exist peacefuly, and that will not happen if they continue to hafve the kind of leadership they have, and don't wake up to the fact that their leaders don't give two shits about them.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN whilst israel's creation may be the original problem, you cant argue that the mess since then is entirely their fault. only israelies, palestinians & anti semites/arabs argue either side is 100% to blame.

Ding! Ding! Ding! That's exactly why it's ENTIRELY their fault. And No, the only people who refuse to acknowledge that are those who are ignorant of the history of the conflict, those who think the indigenous Palestinians don't have any rights, especially the right not be kicked off their own lands, those who are racist, and those who put on a false facade of "impartiallity" since they don't have the balls to condem anything remotely related to anything Jewish. Too bad if you can't handle this, but you fall in the last category. Get over your white guilt and stop punishing the Palestinians for it.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN but thats simply not true. you only have to look at hamas' and hezbollah's stance on the destruction of israel to show peace is the last thing on their minds. and no doubt theres a fair few hawks in the israeli cabinet.

Did you read what I said? I said the "people," not political/militaristic entities.

quote:

Originally posted by Psy-T going on the assumption that the hezbollah are indeed the lebanese government, or at least a part of it (i'm not interested enough to verify that fact), let's see what you just wrote there with some word replacement: Has anyone asked this question however, Israel is pretty assured that Iran is behind this, so why haven't they attacked Syria and Iran if their spokespersons and Ambassador is saying Syria and Iran are behind these actions of the Lebanese government. All I see is a nation in Lebanon that has a pisspoor military capability being attacked because of it's own government.

So then I guess collective punishment of Lebanese society is par for the course, even among a vast sector of society that do not like, endorse or support Hezbollah. Do you feel this will make the Lebanese cower and get rid of Hezbollah. I am not here to debate the rights and wrongs of this conflict, there is enough to go around for both sides of the issue. We can make wordplay and spin things around in circles but the issue remains that you and i know the Lebanese government is incapable of dealing with Hezbollah that has a built up structure in Lebanon, which is a deeply fractious nation.

I still ask the question why not attack Iran if they support, arm and finance Hezbollah and subsequently their actions on Israeli territory. There is little argument in that is there.

quote:

Originally posted by NYCTrancefan Has anyone asked this question however, Israel is pretty assured that Iran is behind this, so why haven't they attacked Syria and Iran if their spokespersons and Ambassador is saying Syria and Iran are behind these Hezbollah actions. All I see is a nation in Lebanon that has a pisspoor military capability being attacked because of Hezbollah.

isn't that obvious? I mean, Hezbollah fired the missiles from Lebanon, not from Syria or Iran. that's why IDF attacked Hezbollah targets in Lebanon.

quote:

Originally posted by ronk isn't that obvious? I mean, Hezbollah fired the missiles from Lebanon, not from Syria or Iran. that's why IDF attacked Hezbollah targets in Lebanon.

Hezbollah receives those missiles and arms used from somewhere, financed from somewhere and it isn't from the Lebanese if you get my drift.

Oil barrels rose to a record high today.

quote:

Originally posted by NYCTrancefan Hezbollah receives those missiles and arms used from somewhere, financed from somewhere and it isn't from the Lebanese if you get my drift.

yeah I get your drift, but what the hell can you do right now?
if you don't attack Lebanon RIGHT NOW, the Hezbollah will continue fire missiles.
if you attack these fuckheads, they'll eventually stop the firing.
later, you can deal with Syria and Iran.

quote:

Originally posted by ronk oh yes, it's our fault. anti-semitism in Europe during ~ 1900 (which led to the first wave of immigration to Israel) has nothing to do with it. so does the Holocaust. the jewish people should have just -- what? set a homeland in the middle of the ocean?

That is NOT what I said. The holocaust was a terrible attrocity, but that doesn't give you the right to go steal someone elses land.

quote:

Originally posted by ronk and by the way, the Jewish leadership agreed to the partition of this land (into a Jewish state and an Arab state) in 1947, while the arabs didn't. so they start a war, we win, the land is ours. end of story.

Right. You took it by force. * pats ronk on the back * How legitimate.

quote:

Originally posted by jonSun Oil barrels rose to a record high today.

Isn't that ironic, in essence more cash for Iran to send to Syria and Lebanon(Hezbollah). I think this whole conflict just sucks for Lebanon a nation that has seen so much shit, if it was Syria or another nation who knows but Lebanon never seems to be able to avoid this fate. Funny thing is its one of the most chilled countries, well in the North that is.

quote:

Originally posted by ronk you can deal with Syria and Iran.

And you can deal with Lebanon alot easier than dealing with Syria & Iran. Today the Iranian president stated that an attack on Syria would be an attack on the whole Muslim world. If Israel attacked Iran or Syria it could mean REAL trouble compared to now.

I've supported Hizballah's actions in the Southern part of Lebanon until Israel's withdrawl in May of 2000. From 1982 until then, Israel was clearly occupying Lebanese territory and Hizballah was rightly viewed as a Lebanese resistance movement by a large majority of Lebanese, whether they be Christian or Muslim, and/or left or right-leaning.

Ever since then, however, I've been ambivalent about their role in Lebanese politics and society in general, but tolerated their actions in the South because they generally acted as a deterrent to potential Israeli threats/attacks on Lebanon and have done and continue to do enormous amounts of social and humanitarian work in the formely occupied areas, unlike the Lebanese government that clearly wasn't/isn't capable or interested in investing any significant amount of resources in the affected areas. I did, however, view the Shebaa farms pretext that is usually given to justify their continued presence there as rather unbelievable, considering the fact that none of the maps ever drafted by the Lebanese government included the farms on the Lebanese side of the border. The Wikipedia article on this is rather fair and balanced. This, coupled with clear support for Hizballah from Syria and Iran, who clearly have their own agenda with Israel, and Nasrallah's claims that Hizballah intended to widen their scope of operations to support Palestinian resistance against Israel, though noble in intent, left me torn as to my position via-a-vis their actions, and worried about a potential slip-up that may cost Lebanon dearly in the long run.

Fast forward to yesterday's actions and this slip-up may have just occured. Although I admire Nasrallah for all he's done for Lebanon, and consider him to be quite astute as a military strategist, I fear that he may have committed a massive blunder. It is rather clear that Hizballah is strongly influenced by its external funders and donors (see Syria and Iran), but Nasrallah has always toed that line between defending Lebanon first and foremost and executing orders from Syria rather marvellously until recently. His vociferous support for Syria's continued presence in Lebanon during the Hariri saga was damaging enough, but Hizballah's current actions that have put the entirety of Lebanon at risk are even more so. The kidnapping of the Israeli soldiers was a move in solidarity with Hamas and the Palestinian struggle in Gaza and their kidnapped soldier situation (and Nasrallah has admitted as much), and it also occured in the aftermath of IDF fighter jets violating Syria's sovereign airspace on June 30th with Syria vowing retribution. Click here Although I do believe that this operation was planned by Hizballah a while back to secure the release of 3 Lebanese fighters still in Israeli hands that were not let go in the 2004 prisoner exchange between the two parties (click here), it's clear to me that Hizballah, through orders from Syria, was waiting for the right opportunity to unleash this.

Because of this, I cannot justify supporting Hizballah in their actions yesterday. Although I strongly support Palestinian resistance against Israeli aggression, and usually laud any debilitating action against Israel, Hizballah cannot claim any moral or ethical mandate on behalf of all Lebanese vis a vis the Palestinian situation or any other situation external to Lebanon, which is what would be required since all of Lebanon is at risk now. Hizballah is alienating a large portion of the Lebanese population (see non Shias) with their current actions, and I only hope that Nasrallah wakes up soon enough to realize this.

As for Israel, they have officially lost their marbles. Their actions, causing massive civilian casualties (already in the 40s) and infrastructural damage is absolutely, positively, beyond disproportionate. The entirety of Lebanon is being punished for the actions of a militant organization that does nor represent a majority of them or their views (or at the very least, a very large minority of them). Olmert's government is going to plunge Israel into a real mess if they decide to sustain their Lebanese offensive and bring in ground forces as planned. We all know what happened to Israel last time they tried to occupy Lebanese territory. Furthermore, their continued insistence on blaming the Lebanese government for Hizballah's actions reeks of ignorance or pretext. Surely they know that the Lebanese parliament is dominated by Anti-Syrian members that would have never given the "ok" for this operation, and that they are completely powerless to do anything vis a vis Hizballah, save begin a new civil war in Lebanon. Either way, if they really think they can recover their kidnapped soldiers and eliminate Hizballah by attacking/invading Lebanon, they will be sorely disappointed.

quote:

Originally posted by occrider So just to reiterate, it's a good thing that Sharon is gone now right? Despite him being relatively in control with the Hawkish branch of Israelis, so much so that he could diplomatically coordinate prisoner swaps when the situation warranted diplomacy, and he was spearheading disengagement in the west bank following gaza, I'm SO glad that things are so much better with him gone! FFS he was no saint but he was the only leader capable of effectively corraling over-reactionary Israelis through the debacle (complete utter failure? ... I'm still waiting for a government with any kind of effective mandate) that is the Palestinian movement. Not to say I told you so ...

Point taken.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z That is NOT what I said. The holocaust was a terrible attrocity, but that doesn't give you the right to go steal someone elses land.

oh god.
look mate, in the first years of the immigration, the arabs who lived here couldn't care less for the jewish people who came. most of the lands the jewish lived on were actually BOUGHT from the arabs (JNF).

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Right. You took it by force. * pats ronk on the back * How legitimate.

hey, we won the war. we wanted peace, fuck how many times do I have to say this? back then we agreed to the partition, they didn't. they attacked us, with the help of Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, etc. they brought this situation upon them.

quote:

Originally posted by jonSun And you can deal with Lebanon alot easier than dealing with Syria & Iran. Today the Iranian president stated that an attack on Syria would be an attack on the whole Muslim world. If Israel attacked Iran or Syria it could mean REAL trouble compared to now.

I think we all pretty much agree that Ahmadinejad is kinda nuts, and in my opinion his statement has no basis. he also have connections to al-qaeda as far as I know, so I don't think most of the world-wide muslim leaders would want any relations with this crazy Iranian.
besides, Egypt and Jordan has peace with Israel, Lebanon's very weak. so that leaves Iraq, Iran and Syria. Iraq, well, we all know what's going on there. so that leaves Syria and Iran, which, like I said, I think we can deal with.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z That the most illogical statement I've ever heard from you. Ofcourse the root cause of a problem is relevant to the problem. Are you on crack?

but its not. the only way the root cause is relevant is if the root cause can be attended to. root cause = creation of israel. root answer therefore = destruction of israel. now we know thats not going to be the answer, so to point fingers back 60 years is irrelevant in today's modern context.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z continue to have the kind of leadership they have, and don't wake up to the fact that their leaders don't give two shits about them.

as opposed to the palestinian groups that send young men off to market strapped with explosives?

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Ding! Ding! Ding! That's exactly why it's ENTIRELY their fault. And No, the only people who refuse to acknowledge that are those who are ignorant of the history of the conflict, those who think the indigenous Palestinians don't have any rights, especially the right not be kicked off their own lands, those who are racist, and those who put on a false facade of \"impartiallity\" since they don't have the balls to condem anything remotely related to anything Jewish. Too bad if you can't handle this, but you fall in the last category. Get over your white guilt and stop punishing the Palestinians for it.

so, what youre saying is that if a wrong occurs then no matter how that wrong is punished and how many times, its still ok because those that started the 'fight' deserve it? therefore the citizens of nagasaki & hiroshima or dresden deserved what they got? it would be ok for native americans or aboriginal australians to go round blowing civilians to pieces?

im not debating that the creation of israel and their conduct since hasnt been the root cause of many of the problems, but israel is there now. its not going anywhere. to think differently just isnt realistic. and this is what the militants have got to understand. yes, of course the palestinians have rights (in my eyes) but those rights do not include kidnapping israeli soldiers.

again, you havent countered my statement re: is this the reward israel gets for making territory concessions?

oh, and have you read anything else ive posted in this thread? ive condemned several actions by israel, so dont lay that bullshit at my feet. i am impartial, in that i criticise both sides. but yes on this occasion the impetus for violence isnt israel, though i certainly think theyre taking things too far.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Did you read what I said? I said the \"people,\" not political/militaristic entities.

yeah, ok. i misread that. i agree.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z quote: Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN whilst israel's creation may be the original problem, you cant argue that the mess since then is entirely their fault. only israelies, palestinians & anti semites/arabs argue either side is 100% to blame. Ding! Ding! Ding! That's exactly why it's ENTIRELY their fault. And No, the only people who refuse to acknowledge that are those who are ignorant of the history of the conflict, those who think the indigenous Palestinians don't have any rights, especially the right not be kicked off their own lands, those who are racist, and those who put on a false facade of "impartiallity" since they don't have the balls to condem anything remotely related to anything Jewish. Too bad if you can't handle this, but you fall in the last category. Get over your white guilt and stop punishing the Palestinians for it.

do you not see how arbitrarily you place the begining of the conflict here? cause and effect/history did not start on the 14th of may, 1948.

quote:

Originally posted by NYCTrancefan So then I guess collective punishment of Lebanese society is par for the course, even among a vast sector of society that do not like, endorse or support Hezbollah.

i didn't assert that, i only commented on the fallacy that lebanon has little to do with the hezbollah.

quote:

Originally posted by NYCTrancefan Do you feel this will make the Lebanese cower and get rid of Hezbollah. I am not here to debate the rights and wrongs of this conflict, there is enough to go around for both sides of the issue. We can make wordplay and spin things around in circles but the issue remains that you and i know the Lebanese government is incapable of dealing with Hezbollah that has a built up structure in Lebanon, which is a deeply fractious nation. I still ask the question why not attack Iran if they support, arm and finance Hezbollah and subsequently their actions on Israeli territory. There is little argument in that is there.

and i have no answer, as i'm uneducated on this entire issue.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Right. You took it by force. * pats ronk on the back * How legitimate.

is there any other way?

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.