PDA

View Full Version : Middle-East


Sabeena
27-07-2006, 13:25
This is sick, not sure if its a joke or not, i received in an email,
Iraeli kids (http://s2.supload.com/image.php?get=israel.jpg)

Dear Lebanese/Palestinian/Arab/Muslim/Christians - Kids,

Die with love.

Yours,
Israeli Kids


Hate, disgust, extreme…. I don't know what word can describe these photos.

And they say that we are teaching our kids hate to Israelis!

Thank you, Israel kids, we received your gifts. See…

QueenBee
27-07-2006, 13:34
That's so weird... why the hell is some hot woman dressed nicely standing in the background like some school teacher?

It's really not the kids' fault though, they're completely brainwashed just like all those other assholes. Martyrs for Allah :rolleyes: (nothing against Allah or islam but not a good excuse to kill)

Rachel
27-07-2006, 17:46
It's really not the kids' fault though, they're completely brainwashed just like all those other assholesBut those people in turn were brainwashed too. They are just as much victims.

QueenBee
27-07-2006, 17:47
Rachel, of course! I admit I shouldn't have called them assholes, but it really upsets me. Especially since they push it onto others, the hate just grows more and more.

Rachel
27-07-2006, 17:48
Who are "they" though? Where does the initial blame lay? *fascinated by this*

QueenBee
27-07-2006, 17:52
I have no idea. :dknow: It goes way back in time, really... and nobody thinks outside of the box, so people just keep hating eachother, and the war goes on, and it makes the hate grow. I know a few people from Palestine and their hate for the jews is mind-blowing. If a jew would come to my old neighbourhood they'd probably be beaten up... :(

I recommend the movie "Death in Gaza" (nothing to do with the Lebanon attacks obviously) if anyone is interested in all this, it's a documentary and the guy who made it was killed by Jewish soldiers. It really touched me, because he interviewed some boys who wanted to become suicide bombers, and in the end... well you just need to watch it!

la_fee_verte
27-07-2006, 22:06
I don't understand what the point of writing on the missiles is. They aren't going to get a chance to read it at the other end. I think something that they are missing, as with alot of other people in the world, is empathy for man. I have found that not alot of people relate to others and are just like 'so what'? and then it is suggested that 'what if it was happening to you'? then people go 'well its not is I dont have to worry about it'.

Another thing that annoys me (kind of along these lines) is when people like teachers and such say about certain situations 'You will never understand what they went through' especially about war. Well maybe I won't first hand, but I have been to Belguim and Terezin and I have a very vivid imagination so I can actually appreciate the pain they went through.

GAH! I am not a normal teenager!

Khartoun2004
27-07-2006, 22:52
It's really not the kids' fault though, they're completely brainwashed just like all those other assholes. Martyrs for Allah :rolleyes: (nothing against Allah or islam but not a good excuse to kill)

Israeli children aren't brainwashed. How would you like it if almost everyday you heard about a bus load of children being blown up by a hamas suicide bomber while they were on their way to school and tomorrow it could be you or your parents on their way to work? Israel is a tiny little country full of the worlds Jews that established a Jewish country because no one else wanted them. And they aren't even safe there because of militant islamic groups.

Rachel
27-07-2006, 23:07
Israeli children aren't brainwashed. How would you like it if almost everyday you heard about a bus load of children being blown up by a hamas suicide bomber while they were on their way to school and tomorrow it could be you or your parents on their way to work?And Israel aren't doing the same now? :rolleyes:

***

Trouble: I was watching a debate on animal testing and I just can't watch anymore. Researchers are sick. They were talking about experiments such as surgery on a monkey's brain to give it a stroke and surgery on a dog to make it incontinent. Makes me wanna cry :(

Khartoun2004
27-07-2006, 23:34
And Israel aren't doing the same now? :rolleyes:

There is always collateral damage in war. The Israelis are bombing beruit because they are protecting a terrorist cell that took Israeli soldiers hostage. If they hadn't taken the soldiers there wouldn't be a problem.

If the Israelis are guilty of war crimes for bombing Beruit, then NATO is just as guilty for bombing Yugoslavia during the Kosovo crisis and the allied forces for the bombing of Dresden. It's all comes down to intention. And the Israelis will not take any bullshit from anyone, because to do so, would be to repeat History. I don't think anyone wants the murder of another 6 million Jews on their conscious.

Rachel
27-07-2006, 23:51
There is always collateral damage in war. The Israelis are bombing beruit because they are protecting a terrorist cell that took Israeli soldiers hostage. If they hadn't taken the soldiers there wouldn't be a problem.

It's all comes down to intention. And the Israelis will not take any bullshit from anyone, because to do so, would be to repeat History. I don't think anyone wants the murder of another 6 million Jews on their consciousKhartoun, this in 2006, not 1939. The taking of the soldiers is not gonna cause 6 million Jews to get killed. That would not happen again. And if you're gonna mention that, would it be ok if 6 million Lebanese people (yes, I know the population of Lebanon is not that big!) were killed instead? Whether someone is jew, muslim, straight, gay, lebanese etc they are still human, we are all the same.

It's all about the degree of response, Israel are doing some major over reacting right now. And lets be honest, this isn't even about Hezbollah. It's innocent civilians that they are targeting and that are dying.

If the Israelis are guilty of war crimes for bombing Beruit, then NATO is just as guilty for bombing Yugoslavia during the Kosovo crisis and the allied forces for the bombing of Dresden..I don't know enough about that to comment but I'm against all war, so you're probably right there.

The world would be a better place without us.The amazon rain forest wouldn't be getting destroyed if we weren't here either (I'm guessing you've seen about this on the news.) This is gonna cause some bad shit :(

haku
27-07-2006, 23:52
There is always collateral damage in war. The Israelis are bombing beruit because they are protecting a terrorist cell that took Israeli soldiers hostage. If they hadn't taken the soldiers there wouldn't be a problem.600 Lebanese *civilians* killed (not to mention half a million homeless) in retaliation for 2 *soldiers* captured, that's an incredible over reaction. If Western countries reacted like that each time Westerners are taken hostage in the Middle-East, we would have already nuked the whole region.
But the 2 soldiers captured were just an excuse anyway, Israel was planning the destruction of Lebanon for a long time, it was just a good opportunity to start the aggression, with of course the help of the US as usual which is currently sending tons of missiles to Israel to help killing even more Lebanese people.

Rachel
27-07-2006, 23:55
But the 2 soldiers captured was just an excuse, Israel was planning the destruction of Lebanon for a long time, it was just a good opportunity to start the aggression, with of course the help of the US as usual which is currently sending tons of missiles to Israel to help killing even more Lebanese.Oh totally! The American government are loving this. They are getting a target of theirs killed in a nice cheap way for them. No loss of American life, keeps the Americans happy. No wonder Bush is smirking.

haku
28-07-2006, 00:07
The American government are loving this.
Oh absolutely, the Americans actually want the conflict to expand and worsen, they want somehow to drag Syria in the conflict, that's the ideal scenario for the US. Once Syria is dragged into it, US troops will be able to attack the country on its Eastern border from Iraq, and Israeli troops will be able to attack Syria on its Western border from Lebanon, they will crush Syria in a few weeks. That way Israel and the US will control everything from Lebanon to Iraq, and they will be in a perfect position for the next step in their crazy war, the destruction and invasion of Iran.

Khartoun2004
28-07-2006, 02:27
600 Lebanese *civilians* killed (not to mention half a million homeless) in retaliation for 2 *soldiers* captured, that's an incredible over reaction.

Ok yes you're right it is an over reaction to this particular situation, but you are also forgetting that conflicts between Israel and the surrounding Middle East countries has been going on since before Israel was even a state. Don't forget that Lebannon, Syria, and Jordan tried to annilate the Israelis right after the UN named it a soverign state, long before the US started to back them, in fact when they had no backing from any other country. Israel wouldn't have lasted this long if it wasn't for the fact that they "over react" and use US made bombs.

Oh absolutely, the Americans actually want the conflict to expand and worsen, they want somehow to drag Syria in the conflict, that's the ideal scenario for the US.

I'm not so sure about that. I think Bush would much rather go after Iran. Since if you recall Iran, not Syria is apart of Bush's "Axis of Evil". But wait until after the mid-term elections and hope the Democrats can win a majority in the Senate. If that happens I seriously doubt Bush will be in power much longer. He has Impeachment written all over him.

QueenBee
28-07-2006, 04:29
Israeli children aren't brainwashed.
I think they are, I think all of them are. It's not unnatural though, as you said, people are being killed left and right. I don't see where else all the hate can come from when it comes to civilians. Even people I know who don't even live there, hate the Jews (*all* jews, not just israeli people). That's because they were taught to hate them even though they are not the ones throwing the bombs. Anyway, nobody is right in the fight and no-one is doing the right thing. I just feel sorry for the Lebanese people, just look at what haku said. :( I know some people who have family over there, I hope they are all right. A friend of mine was also in Lebanon when the attacks started (on vacation) but luckily she could escape with her family to Egypt and is returning home. :)

Trouble: I was watching a debate on animal testing and I just can't watch anymore. Researchers are sick. They were talking about experiments such as surgery on a monkey's brain to give it a stroke and surgery on a dog to make it incontinent. Makes me wanna cry
I can never watch things like that. Animal cruelty is the worst thing I know, I even feel more sorry for the animals than human beings... I mean, they are completely helpless and are being used and tortured. :(

What's even worse is when they test cosmetics on animals. That's just beyond sick.

haku
28-07-2006, 19:55
Don't forget that Lebannon, Syria, and Jordan tried to annilate the Israelis right after the UN named it a soverign state.And that's because Israel was created by 'taking' lands to Arabs, and of course Arabs did not agree. Who would agree to have a piece of their territory given to someone else without even being consulted? The artificial recreation of Israel out of Arab lands is the biggest mistake ever made by the winners of WWII, and is the root of all the problems in the region.

Khartoun2004
29-07-2006, 04:20
And that's because Israel was created by 'taking' lands to Arabs, and of course Arabs did not agree. Who would agree to have a piece of their territory given to someone else without even being consulted? The artificial recreation of Israel out of Arab lands is the biggest mistake ever made by the winners of WWII, and is the root of all the problems in the region.

Don't blame the Israelis for that. If you have to blame someone, blame the English and their Balfour Declaration of 1934 that promised both the Jews and the Palestinians the same stretch of land. Half of the land given to the Jews by the UN conference in 1948 was already owned by them. An entire half century before that the Jews had been buying up property from the Palestinians that was nothing but useless swamp land and desert. Once the Jews bought enough land for a small town they set up little villages and made the land fertile again and they thrived and that was the pattern they followed for decades. There were over 30 communities of Jewish farmers by 1948.

Also, the Israelis told the Palestinians, after it was declaraed a contry by the UN, to stay in their homes and they would gladly share their new country with the poeple they had coexisted with for over 50 years peacefully. It was the Syrian Islamic leader that told the Arab world to revolt and murder the Jews and told the Palestinians to leave. Only to promptly set up concentration camps for the Palestinians because they didn't have "room" for them in their countries.

haku
01-08-2006, 22:59
This is sick, not sure if its a joke or not, i received in an email,
Iraeli kids (http://s2.supload.com/image.php?get=israel.jpg)
This website (http://www.fromisraeltolebanon.com/) uses the picture as well, it's no joke.

The death toll (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5233842.stm) continues to grow, Israel has now killed 750 Lebanese civilians (1 third being kids), a total massacre.

And far from trying to stop the slaughter, the US is actively sending tons of bombs (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/5235192.stm) to Israel to help them kill even more Lebanese people and annihilate the country.

Rachel
01-08-2006, 23:04
It makes me SO angry that they are using our airports and airbases to send murder weapons over there. It makes me disgusted and ashamed to be British. Ashamed that we have a prime minister that we voted in that is following Bush like a little lost puppy.

This makes me so depressed and the pictures here (http://www.fromisraeltolebanon.com/) are even too horrific to describe.

freddie
01-08-2006, 23:27
600 Lebanese *civilians* killed (not to mention half a million homeless) in retaliation for 2 *soldiers* captured, that's an incredible over reaction. If Western countries reacted like that each time Westerners are taken hostage in the Middle-East, we would have already nuked the whole region.

There's a huge difference though between foreign civilians or soldiers are being held hostage and Israeli soldiers being kidnaped on their own teritory. That is a breech of geo-political sovergnity - one of the harshest things that could be done in international law. It's literaly a decleration of war and Hezbollah knew that damn well. I'm absolutely convinced every extremist military organization thrives on war and chaos, since that's when their suport is at it's strongest. And Hezbollah is in no way different. This latest war is a blessing in disguise for them, since they'll be able to recruit a bunch of new people who're 10 or 12 today and are in the process of starting to hate Israel as we speak. I think Israel did a foolish thing to retaliate in this manner, but I also think it's unjustified to demonize them. They're doing what many countries would do if their sovergnity was threatened in such a way. It's just a question of whether it's a smart move or not in this case to follow "an eye for an eye" tactic at this point in time. Make no mistake about it though - Hezbollah is the source of TRUE evil here. They know exactly what they're doing and this propaganda stick with "israelis killing innocent lebanese" which people are so hastily adapting without prejudice is suiting them nicely. Lets not forget those that most Lebanese civilians die cause Hezbollah militants hide inside densely poopulated areas and thus literaly using civilians as a human shield. Classy indeed.

haku
02-08-2006, 00:45
There's a huge difference though between foreign civilians or soldiers are being held hostage and Israeli soldiers being kidnaped on their own territory. That is a breech of geo-political sovergnity - one of the harshest things that could be done in international law.
First of all, Israel regularly assassinates Arab leaders outside its borders, and Israel has conducted many air strikes on neighboring countries (for no other reasons than that infamous 'preemptive action' concept which basically allows Israel to kill anyone and destroy anything it wants because it *might* someday be a threat).
So what's the rule here? Israel can strike at will on Arabs outside its borders, but Arabs can't strike back on Israeli soil? Please.

Second, from an Arab point of view, Israel is occupying Arab lands, therefore the Israeli army is an occupying force and a legitimate target. Resistance fighters capturing occupying soldiers is within what's acceptable during a war, retaliating on civilians to 'punish' that attack on soldiers is *not*, during WWII the German army was also regularly retaliating on French civilians each time the French resistance attacked German soldiers, it was a war crime then, it is a war crime now.

this propaganda stick with "israelis killing innocent lebanese"
It's no propaganda, Israel is killing hundreds of civilians.

dradeel
02-08-2006, 02:21
Wasn't it Hizbollah that "kidnapped these two soldiers"? Well, if I'm not getting it wrong, Hizbollah is a terror organization like f.ex Hamas, but without being in government in Lebanon? Well... Israel isn't fighting the _organization_ but all of Lebanon because people could potentially hide Hizbollah-people..... They're killing bunch of innocent and even destroyed a FN-base that has been in the area for decades! And then their FN-ambassador have this super-arrogant speech about the whole issue. And when people here at home criticize them for their warfare their ambassador in norway says it's anti-semitism and blasphemy while being extreme hypocritical :bum: Gawd, how I wish that USA wasn't being their protective big brother. Or how I'd wish that FN never made the country in the first place. It has brought nothing but sorrow and misery between the western and the islamic parts of the world.

PowerPuff Grrl
02-08-2006, 02:29
Why do we keep saying "Arab?" Which Arabs are we talking about here?

Are you assuming that they are all united, and that borders within the Middle East are arbitrary or something? Because I can assure you that Arabs are not, have never been and will never be united for anything. The Pan-Arab movement dreamt by Nasser is long dead.
It died when Jordan stuck its neck out Palestinians by housing them and fighting on behalf of them only to have Palestinians (the Fedayeen) attempt to overthrow the Kingdom. It also died in Beirut when Palestinians (PLO) tried to claim it as their own by further splintering the religious groups during the civil war.
Iraq's invasion of Kuwait is another fine example of Arab unity. And with the war now in Iraq, the sheer fact that Shiites are dying more than anyone else including the occupying force can give just you an illustration of how much they hate each other.

And you can see it now with this war. It is the Shiites that are fighting Israelis in Lebanon, not the Sunnis, Druze, or Christians, just the Shiites. Notice how the Sunnis are reacting throughout the Middle East, dead silence. They sure as shit don't want Shiite revival, especially facing the potential of Iran exanding all across the Middle East. Tells you something about the "Arab" unity when at least half of Arabs would rather Israel exist than let Shiites become more prominent in the region than they already are.

Hezbollah is nothing but a bunch of shit disturbers. They are willing to throw an entire country into another war where most don't even support it, and what's worse, know exactly how fragile the country is in that the gov't can't prevent it and will most probably it'll be even harder for the country to bounce back from this compared to before. What do they care anyway, they are more allied to Syria and Iran than to Lebanon.

freddie
02-08-2006, 06:05
First of all, Israel regularly assassinates Arab leaders outside its borders, and Israel has conducted many air strikes on neighboring countries (for no other reasons than that infamous 'preemptive action' concept which basically allows Israel to kill anyone and destroy anything it wants because it *might* someday be a threat).
So what's the rule here? Israel can strike at will on Arabs outside its borders, but Arabs can't strike back on Israeli soil? Please.

Those "Arab leaders" are usually leaders of terrorist groups which Israel hunts down for national security reasons. Things they take action against ARE a threat when they do it. Hezbollah has absolutely no "national security reasons" to kidnap those soldiers. All they wanted to do (and succeded in doing) is gain notoriety from it.

Second, from an Arab point of view, Israel is occupying Arab lands, therefore the Israeli army is an occupying force and a legitimate target. Resistance fighters capturing occupying soldiers is within what's acceptable during a war, retaliating on civilians to 'punish' that attack on soldiers is *not*, during WWII the German army was also regularly retaliating on French civilians each time the French resistance attacked German soldiers, it was a war crime then, it is a war crime now.
Arab point of view doesn't matter when it comes to borders recognized by the UN and the international community. They can claim someone took their land all they want, but at the end of the day they're still breeching sovereignty of another country - which is a valid reason for attack - and Hezbollah militants knew that damn well. They stired things up and then retreat back to civilian facilities, so there'll be massive collateral damage in case Israel strikes. THAT is what's killing those innocent civilians.

I still think Israelis are silly for letting themselves get provoked by it to react in such a manner. It'll only fuel the fire for future conflicts as extremists get stronger and stronger during this conflict (and any conflict for that matter). But I don't think for a minute not them or the US had destroying Lebanon on their agenda any time soon. If anything Lebanon was a success story in the Middle East. A blue-print of how a moderate Arab country should operate - despite all the divisions between Arabs and other religious groups in the country. Unfortunately they're being taken hostage by Hezbollah militias (which is partly their fault for letting it in the first place).

Why do we keep saying "Arab?" Which Arabs are we talking about here?
Religious extremists want nothing more than a quasi united front against a common zionist enemy. For as long as they have something to fight from the outside they won't actually deal with matters of their own ethnic and cultural divisions - that comes later when there's no one around to get in conflicts with. Every militia group in the middle east uses the same rhetoric - it's the attack on the whole muslim world... ALL muslims - not just Arabs - should fight a religious war against the forces from the outside trying to destroy Islam blahblahblah... I know it's all bullshit but for the time being they'll feed this all-muslim propaganda for as long as it's convenient.

dradeel
02-08-2006, 07:32
Arab point of view doesn't matter when it comes to borders recognized by the UN and the international community.
Too bad that the Israel border at this date were never in original plan of UN. Israel has been greedy from day one, and have been able to be greedy with USA on their side.
Those "Arab leaders" are usually leaders of terrorist groups which Israel hunts down for national security reasons.
...and slaughters innocent people and blows up a 28 year old UN-base on the way and then jokes about it afterwards.

freddie
02-08-2006, 13:28
Too bad that the Israel border at this date were never in original plan of UN. Israel has been greedy from day one, and have been able to be greedy with USA on their side.
That's a very one-sided, black&white view on a very complicated affair. No one got "greedy". There were numerous wars all spawned by inability (from both sides) to make any diplomatic advancements. In 1947 an UN proposal was on the table - Israel accepted it, Arabs didn't. As simple as that.

...and slaughters innocent people and blows up a 28 year old UN-base on the way and then jokes about it afterwards.
No one jokes about it. Mistakes happen. Sometimes tragic mistakes. Super-powers like USSR and USA made their fair share as well - they both took down a commercial jet full of passengers, while mistaking it for a spy aircraft. In this case it's even more clear - there's a war going on and collateral damage was always a part of war. I still think most civilian casualties are Hezbollah's fault since they're using civilians as human shields.

haku
02-08-2006, 14:50
Those "Arab leaders" are usually leaders of terrorist groups which Israel hunts down for national security reasons. Things they take action against ARE a threat when they do it.See? You're justifying the breaking of international law when it's Israel that does it, it's the typical American stance: Israel can do no wrong, Israel is always right.

Arab point of view doesn't matter when it comes to borders recognized by the UN and the international community.I think we all realize that the Arab point of view doesn't matter indeed, it's the all tragedy of the region, Arabs represent 99% of the population, but their point of view has never mattered. And give me a break about the UN and international law, we all know that the US and Israel only respect the UN and international law when they suit their needs and don't give a shit about them when they don't (the murder of those UN observers a few days ago show how much Israel respect the UN, and it was no mistake, Israel regularly murders UN representatives as a 'warning', the first of their victims was UN mediator Folke Bernadotte (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folke_Bernadotte) who was murdered by Israelis in 1948).
The only law that matters in the Middle-East is the American law, either you agree with the US and you are good, or you disagree and you are evil, as simple as that. This brilliant logic leads to obvious double standards: if Israel uses terrorism to achieve its goals, it's right and justified, if Arabs do the same, it's wrong and evil; if Israel annexes Arab territories, it's right and fair, if Arabs try to regain those territories, it's wrong and illegal; if Arabs captures a few Israeli soldiers, it's wrong and criminal, if Israel retaliates by killing hundreds of civilians, it's right and justified; if anyone sends weapons to Lebanon so they can defend themselves, it's illegal and evil, if the US sends tons of high-tech weapons to Israel so they can coninue the attack, it's right and justified.

But I don't think for a minute not them or the US had destroying Lebanon on their agenda any time soon.The destruction of Lebabon was planned, no date was set, but it was planned, you don't send back an entire country to stone age just because of a border incident if you were not already planning to do it. And yes, Lenanon was a success story, all the more reasons for Israel to destroy it, Israel does not want healthy Arab countries on its borders, it wants agonizing Arabs struggling to stay alive.

In 1947 an UN proposal was on the table - Israel accepted it, Arabs didn't. As simple as that.Of course Israel accepted, they were offered half a territory that belonged to somebody else, who would say no to that? And of course Palestinians refused, half of their land was being stolen from them, who would accept such a 'deal'?



As a side note, beyond the murder of UN mediator Folke Bernadotte (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folke_Bernadotte) by the Israelis, people who think Israel is run by angels may want to check those pages on Irgun (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irgun) and Lehi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lehi_%28group%29), the terrorist arm of Israel in the early days. Those Israeli terrorists murdered hundreds of people and were of course never punished for their actions, quite the contrary, most of them like Yitzhak Shamir became prominent politicians or formed the Mossad (the organization that now conducts Israel's terrorist actions), another example that 'terrorism' is often a question of perspective, if you win you are a hero, if you lose you are a criminal. The hypocrisy being of course that israel which was built on terrorism now condems Arabs for doing exactly the same.

nath
02-08-2006, 15:42
Don't blame the Israelis for that. If you have to blame someone, blame the English and their Balfour Declaration of 1934
I absolutely agree with that, Laura.

And yes, Lenanon was a success story, all the more reasons for Israel to destroy it, Israel does not want healthy Arab countries on its borders, it wants agonizing Arabs struggling to stay alive.
I think that Israël is going a lot too much in destroying Lebanon.
I would say poor Lebanon....who is paying for the Syrians...

So, all depends of your points of view:
-Or you think that Israël has no reason and no right to exist and in a such case...Israël has all wrong.
-Or you think that may be it was a mistake at the origin: the artificial creation of Israël but now Israël is here, it has right to exist....but in a such case, I personnaly think that Syria and iran should have been the direct targets of Israël.
Cause Lebanon was a peaceful country before to be taken as hostage by Syria.
Of course Syrian army has left Lebanon some months ago but Syrians are everywhere in the administration...everywhere...Lebanon still belongs to Syria.

Just some thoughs:
I disagree with what Israël is doing right now to Lebanon.

Palestinians, instead of trying to install themselves in the part of territories which were given to them and to try to get more territories thanks to the international negociations, have prefered to vote for the resistance by weapons...so...there is no hope.

It's clear now that Israël doesn't want a Palestinian state.
But who would like to have a neighbor who just wants to kill you?

Now if you think it's good to destroy and erase Israël , do it in giving credits to all the attentats against it....may be the destruction of Israël will happen in the future...

Patrick, even if I totally condamn all those dead people in Lebanon too...you who are so good with numbers....could you tell me how many people the "guerilla" has killed of civilians in Irak until now please?
Why do you accept that, Pat ? I mean I've never seen one post from you condamning all those murders each day in Irak....each day you have 65 deaths, or 15 days....or....in the civil population. It's more than 800 persons now.

By the way Lebanon was an artificially built country too if my memory is good, isn't it?
~~~
Israëlians kill their enemies.
Palestinans/resistants kill their enemies.
But people who kill civilians from their own camp....sorry I can't understand that . :(

haku
02-08-2006, 17:02
Patrick, even if I totally condamn all those dead people in Lebanon too...you who are so good with numbers....could you tell me how many people the "guerilla" has killed of civilians in Irak until now please?
Why do you accept that, Pat ? I mean I've never seen one post from you condamning all those murders each day in Irak....each day you have 65 deaths, or 15 days....or....in the civil population. It's more than 800 persons now.I've expressed my opposition to the US invasion of Iraq many times, i thougth it would lead to civil war and there it is. But my point of view has lost and i have nothing more to add, i'm letting the pro-Americans rejoice over their victory.

Now i'm expressing my opposition to the destruction of Lebanon, and once that destruction is over, i'll shut up and let the pro-Israelis rejoice over their victory.

And when Syria and Iran are attacked by the US, i'll express one again my opposition.

I don't believe in that new 'world order' that the US wants to impose on all of us by force, and i'll prostest at each step of that madness. As for protesting against the chaos that follows each of those steps, it's pointless since it is the direct result of the initial attacks and way too late to do anything.

By the way Lebanon was an artificially built country too if my memory is good, isn't it?I wouldn't say that, Phenicia has existed since Antiquity and the land between the sea and the Lebanon mountains has always been inhabited by a distinct population.

nath
02-08-2006, 17:54
i'm letting the pro-Americans rejoice over their victory. let the pro-Israelis rejoice over their victory.
Sorry Pat but those sentences are just pure rethoric for me.


As for protesting against the chaos that follows each of those steps, it's pointless since it is the direct result of the initial attacks and way too late to do anything.
I don't think so.
When you see people murdered each day, I don't think "it's pointless" to react.

Can we really speak here about a "civil war" by the way? Or some of those attentats aren't the acts of some people who have never lived in Irak before?
So can't we call that a "new order world" too with an islamist domination instead of an american domination?

xmad
02-08-2006, 19:05
It's so obvious that Iran supports Hezbollah so next target is going to be Iran for being destroyed.
But what's the civilians fault?
Killing civilians is going to make anything better?

dradeel
02-08-2006, 22:04
No one jokes about it.
Israel's UN-ambassador ment that UN should never take part in any peacekeeping missions in Lebanon and made fun about UN interim forces saying "In UN interim means 28 years" - and that's right after they bombed the place to dust, killing 4 UN workers! - And he continued with claiming that the UN forces placed in the area were only there for being a buffer between Israel and Lebanon, not to help and maintain peace in Lebanon, and last that Hizbollah militants have been using the UN base for help and protection against Israel ... as if the UN base was cooperating with Hizbollah against Israel.

That's heavy accusations... I call that making fun of, and in a fairly presumptuous way.

It's so obvious that Iran supports Hezbollah so next target is going to be Iran for being destroyed.
Iran supports Hizbollah with money, and both Iran and Syria supports Hizbollah morally. However, I do believe that Syria supports them with guns and ammo as well. I don't think going to war against Iran will help a single thing. It would be hopeless. However, Syria ... there you have the biggest thorn in your foot. A country filled with terrorists, ready to supply any terrorist organization with tons of weapons and money. Why Israel is bombing Lebanon and not Syria is beyond my grasp. They would've cut Hizbollah off at once and could be fighting terrorists as they should be doing...

haku
03-08-2006, 18:31
Sorry Pat but those sentences are just pure rethoric for me.And i'm sorry you think that's meaningless.

What is happening in Iraq now is exactly what i thought would happen before the war started. So many people who knew the region very well had warned the Americans that this war would be a disaster and only bring chaos and destruction, but they went for it anyway and now chaos is there. But i have no interest in saying 'i told you so, look at the mess you've made' since it only leads to even more angry reactions from the pro-war supporters than before the war happened.

When you see people murdered each day, I don't think "it's pointless" to react.Well, i don't see many people reacting about anything political on this forum (unless it's gay rights), at least i'm reacting about *something*, but i don't see why i'm the only one who is always criticized for not reacting about this or that while plenty of people never react about anything.

Rachel
03-08-2006, 18:38
...unless it's gay rightsThat is expected though. Of course the gay & bisexual members here have something to say about that kinda thing. Sadly it's the usual thing of only caring about an issue when it effects you, hence the reason why people seem to think nothing of hundreds of innocent Lebanese civilians dying.

spyretto
03-08-2006, 19:36
Sadly it's the usual thing of only caring about an issue when it effects you, hence the reason why people seem to think nothing of hundreds of innocent Lebanese civilians dying.



I don't agree - lots of people around the world are angry and upset of the civilian losses but after a while you can't react as forcefully. We've allowed the American occupation in Iraq to continue without a practical objective and without a justifiable cause, other that the generic rhetoric for the "war on terror" - That was a lot worse. We're clearly losing the fight.
At least that is collateral damage and it's "regrettable". While terrorists target civilians specifically. So there is a bit of a difference there - or not?
The objective is more tangible in this case - Hezbollah.

nath
03-08-2006, 20:25
Pat, don't be mad at me...you know it's a little game, here, between you and me when we speak about politics...because ours points of views are different...but I have absolutely nothing against you. :)

I've never created a politics thread and I don't think I'll do.
It's often you or Freddie who are at the origin of these threads and I think it's a good thing that they could exist thanks to you.

You say that I'm pro-Israël but I'll make you notice that I have condemned this invasion of Lebanon above.
You think I'm pro-America...I would say I feel myself more as an "Anti "Anti-America"."..which is a little bit different for me.

Here, I've just evocated the fact that If 1 American kills another person, you say it's a scandal.
If an Israeli kills another person, you say it's a scandal.
And you're right, cause each stolen life is a scandal.

But I've just pointed the fact that when several dozens of persons are assassinated by their "brothers", there is no comments against those murderers.

When one person is condemned to the Death Penalty in the States, there are lots of posts but nobody condemns all the Deaths and all the violated Human Rights in Iran.

So as I've already said it, I have just the feeling that the critics are very hard (and sometimes it's justified even to my eyes... ;) ) in "one direction" but that we have very often "the silent" about the same and even worse barbarian acts if they have as origin "the other camp".

Here,about Irak, you've said again that it was the fault of America but you haven't condemned yet these atrocities. Americans were may be at the origin, but they aren't the ones who are bombing in the markets...

PowerPuff Grrl
03-08-2006, 21:02
What is happening in Iraq now is exactly what i thought would happen before the war started. So many people who knew the region very well had warned the Americans that this war would be a disaster and only bring chaos and destruction, but they went for it anyway and now chaos is there. But i have no interest in saying 'i told you so, look at the mess you've made' since it only leads to even more angry reactions from the pro-war supporters than before the war happened.
God, aren't we over-generalizing much?
If I recall correctly there wasn't anybody active today in this entire forum who supported the American invasion of Iraq. Just because some of us kind of support Israel in this particular matter doesn't mean we support every attack on Arabs and Muslims in general.
Furthermore, the current American administration does not represent the sentiment Americans as a whole have towards the war. They didn't support it in the beginning and they sure as shit don't support it now. The last election was won by half of the US's sheer hatred of gays not through the war. If anything hate US's tendency to let homophobia and utter short-sightedness outweigh common sense. I know I do.

As for this whole thing, when it comes to Palestine and Israel, by default I tend to side with Palestine because in the end the simple fact that people cannot go back to their land because some other people are there is fucked up beyond recognition. But my support is waning. Every since Israel pulled out of Gaza there hasn't been one day where Palestinians haven't launched rockets into Israel and pulling out of Lebanon six years ago being seen as weakness by Hezbollah. nath is right, the fear of being "driven to the sea" by your neighbours actually being realized is what drives Israelis to this kind of over-reaction. If every Arab laid his/her weapon down there would be peace in the Middle East, if every Israeli did that there'd be another genocide.

All these years of violence from Palestinians and what has been gained here?
You think Israel is going to leave and return to the welcoming, Jew-loving arms of Iran, Iraq, Poland, Russia, etc?
Give me a break.
Maybe, just maybe Palestinians could try negotiatng for land. Who knows, perhaps the promise of not killing Jews may sound attractive to Israelis.

Khartoun2004
03-08-2006, 21:09
Gawd, how I wish that USA wasn't being their protective big brother.

If the US wasn't helping them, who would? European countries? Please don't drag my country through the mud just because we happen to realize the necesseity of having a Jewish state.

Or how I'd wish that UN never made the country in the first place. It has brought nothing but sorrow and misery between the western and the islamic parts of the world.

yes because the western world is really suffering for it :rolleyes: The western world's suffering started long before 1948. And if the UN hadn't made Israel a country where would the world's displaced Jewish population go? Were they supposed to stay in British internment camps on Cyprus for the rest of eternity? NO ONE wanted them. Not the United States and certainly not the European countries. The Bitish use to send them back to fucking Hamburg when their camps on Cyprus were full and they use to sink cargo ships snicking Jews into Palestine. Where's the Humanity in that?

dradeel
03-08-2006, 21:57
The western world's suffering started long before 1948.
True... there were anti-western groups back in the 1700s and have been to this day, but why feed the fire with more wood? In this case; petrol soaked wood. And the western world has suffered because of it! 9/11, Madrid, London ...? The Islamic hate against the west have never been as big as it is now.
Please don't drag my country through the mud just because we happen to realize the necesseity of having a Jewish state.
The necessity of having a Jewish state? No religious people has the right for their own state. It's like we're treating Israel like the US is treating the native americans... they get their own land and then they can do as they like ... only difference is that the native americans actually lived in america before the white man, but Israel and the Jews has no historic record of having more right over that land than anyone else. The old testament isn't worth a penny as a source for history. And another thing: You can't put one religion above others and say that this people deserve this land more than others, and then push those who live there aside for the jews to settle down..?

Don't get me wrong, I have every sympathy for the jews and their history. I don't wanna sound like some religion-hating soab, but I just don't think making Israel was a good idea. I believe there could've been better ways of handling the situation. :)

And sry, I don't want to drag your country through the mud. I have nothing against America or americans. I admire USA actually, but it's a fact that your government acts like they're world police and stick their nose in everybody's business, and defends Israel at any costs, careless of what the rest of the world thinks. If US had supported UN and pressured Israel to tear down the wall and move back the borders to the original UN plan, then perhaps we could have a more peaceful situation down there. I've said it before, and I say it again; I wish Sharon could've finished his work. You can say whatever you like about that guy, but I think he was actually trying to fix things at the end of his career. And even if he was an asshole at times the new guy now is much worse :none:

xmad
04-08-2006, 10:12
In a way I agree with almost all the comments.
Well,do you know what "hezbollah" means?? it means "soldiers of God". Wish I could ask them these questions. 1-when did the God want you to be his soldiers?
2-How did he say that?:rolleyes:
When one person is condemned to the Death Penalty in the States, there are lots of posts but nobody condemns all the Deaths and all the violated Human Rights in Iran.
very true point. :done:
Here in Iran we are not even allowed to talk about politic on the phone. Afew months ago when I was in Cyprus they warned my family about this. All they did was just ringing one of the Iranian channels in the US. They didnt even answer the phone.

freddie
04-08-2006, 11:51
Of course Israel accepted, they were offered half a territory that belonged to somebody else, who would say no to that? And of course Palestinians refused, half of their land was being stolen from them, who would accept such a 'deal'?
"Stolen"? You're using the extremist rhetoric here. A lot of that land was bought lawfully. Once you SELL something you can't just demand it back cause your people lived there in the past (btw... no one recognizes how the israelis had a presence in the region for 3 millenia as well). Maybe Russia should demand the return of Alaska from the US one of these days?

The destruction of Lebabon was planned, no date was set, but it was planned, you don't send back an entire country to stone age just because of a border incident if you were not already planning to do it. And yes, Lenanon was a success story, all the more reasons for Israel to destroy it, Israel does not want healthy Arab countries on its borders, it wants agonizing Arabs struggling to stay alive.
That is absolute rubbish. Israel needs moderate Arab states more than anything else. It's the only hope it'll ever have of stabilization in the region and you can be sure Israeli people and it's leaders know that damn well. Do you think they purpusefully want to stir shit? What for? So they can get bombed some more? To invite a new wave of suidice bombers? It makes no sense to plan the destruction of Lebanon. Israel wants happy Arabs, cause that's the only way they themselves will live in peace. One thing it doesn't want though is happy arabs who still support extremist groups who's active political and military agenda is to drive Israelis into the sea. Healthy, moderate Arab countries are are a rare jewel, treasured by USA as well as Israel. But you can't count Lebanon as one of those for as long as they have Hezbollah in their parliament - so Lebanon can still be considered a satelite state of Syria. Let's not forget Lebanese goverment expressed it's utter helplessness when it comes to disarming the Hezbollah, which means the whole country got hijacked by an extremist military group trying to excite violence. They succeded and I bet they also knew damn well everybody will be as near-sighted to blame everything on Israel.

Israel's UN-ambassador ment that UN should never take part in any peacekeeping missions in Lebanon and made fun about UN interim forces saying "In UN interim means 28 years" - and that's right after they bombed the place to dust, killing 4 UN workers! - And he continued with claiming that the UN forces placed in the area were only there for being a buffer between Israel and Lebanon, not to help and maintain peace in Lebanon, and last that Hizbollah militants have been using the UN base for help and protection against Israel ... as if the UN base was cooperating with Hizbollah against Israel.

That's heavy accusations... I call that making fun of, and in a fairly presumptuous way.
If you thought that was meant as UN cooperating with Hezbollah you didn't understand it properly. What he said is Hezbollah was USING UN outposts for it's own human shield. Just as no one blames civilians who're being used by extremists to fire rockets from their homes. They're just a convenient shield.
I think Koffi Annan was much more presumpteous and arrogant when he claimed that the strike on UN forces was intentional before any sort of investigation was conducted.



I'm not pro-Israeli nor pro-Lebanese. I just think we have to look at all the variables before we completely lose every sense of perspective and start bashing the side we instictively label as "the aggressor". I maintain my stance that Israel's actions at this point aren't wise - not because they're not justfied, but rather because they'll strenghten the political might of extremist forces, yet I don't fool myself for a second that Israel wasn't provoked thorougly and systematically into this military enveavour. If anyone here is shameful and disgraceful it's the islamic militants who're using common civilians and infact an entire country to get their point across. Everybody seems to conveniently forget that there are two sides to this story. Everybody also forgets Israel did take steps to remedy the palestine question by pulling out of Gaza and they got bitch-slapped in return. And I'm sure they'd get bitchslapped again if they pulled out of Lebanon now - Hezbollah would interpret it as zionists finally giving up and they'd start attacking even MORE. Don't forget that their ultimate agenda is to drive jews out of middle east completely.
Of course quite a few people on this board think that'd be the proper thing to do. Because many arguments seem to fal back on that "Israel should never exist" shtick. Now even if you disregard those points I made about European jews actually BUYING the land from Arabs and the fact they've been present in the region for more time than any other ethnic group... there's still a fact of today's political reality which is that Israel's borderes are THERE. Like it or not. Those are internationally recognized borders of a country that's a full time members of the United Nations. Every claim how Israel shouldn't exist in useless and obsolete when dealing with today's political reality. If we play that game, where does it all end?! Should the USA exist? Maybe her majesty should anex the region back to her territorial domain and pronounce it part of the commonwealth again. Should Spain exist given the fact it represents a whole plethora of different ethnic groups who're not always that keen on coexisting in the realms of a same country?
See what I mean? That whole point about Israel's right to existance is moot and whoever discusses it again falls back on tabloid-like sensationalist level of Mahmud Ahmadinezhad.

fanoff
04-08-2006, 14:40
all these stuff cant explain nothing more than this pic (http://www.ghaliboun.net/gallery/albums/userpics/10003/normal_qana22.jpg),
or this pic (http://www.fromisraeltolebanon.com/pictures/mainpage.jpg).its war going on there,and its all against nature.i got nothing to say to those who think that the attack of Israel is based on reasonable actions,its just the thing Israel planned for years and this "kidnapping" is just an excuse as we,you,us all know.

nath
04-08-2006, 14:46
fanoff, You can find horrible pics in EACH camp...:(
But I agree with you that this "kidnapping is just an excuse and this invasion was planned for long time...
Now , here, each camp has its own reasons and its own logic.

Rachel
04-08-2006, 15:50
fanoff, this is one of the very very few times when we agree over a political matter :)

dradeel
04-08-2006, 16:36
I'm not pro-Israeli nor pro-Lebanese. I just think we have to look at all the variables before we completely lose every sense of perspective and start bashing the side we instictively label as "the aggressor". I maintain my stance that Israel's actions at this point aren't wise - not because they're not justfied, but rather because they'll strenghten the political might of extremist forces, yet I don't fool myself for a second that Israel wasn't provoked thorougly and systematically into this military enveavour.
Well, yes, I do agree with you there. I don't think Israel are doing these things without a reason. And noone can defend what a terrorist organization is doing, but it's the way Israel is handling the situation that is beyond my grasp. This is not the way.... And how Israel is acting in world politics just makes it harder for the middle east to experience peace in any near future.

fanoff
04-08-2006, 17:06
fanoff, this is one of the very very few times when we agree over a political matter

there are still many ones who dont agree with me over that.btw i didnt know if you did disagree with me on a political subject.or let me guess,its that youre talking about the EU thing:D

Rachel
04-08-2006, 18:19
i didnt know if you did disagree with me on a political subject.or let me guess,its that youre talking about the EU thing:D There's been several things - EU, religion and those cartoons of Mohammad. But this I definately agree with you about :)

Khartoun2004
04-08-2006, 22:19
The necessity of having a Jewish state?

You want evidence that a Jewish state is necessary? Look no further than European History. The Russians and their Pale where they bascially imprisoned all Russian Jews for over a century. The Polish and their Ghettos and Pogroms which murder upwards of hundreds of thousand Jews. Then the Nazis and the Holocaust. The British and the internment of the survivors of the Holocaust. Plus, all European countries with the except of Denmark and Sweden have always had a very subtle anti-semitism within their own cultures. Go learn some of the history of the Jewish people because being Jewish is more than just a Religion. It's cultural and ethnic.

Israel and the Jews has no historic record of having more right over that land than anyone else. The old testament isn't worth a penny as a source for history.

Again go learn some history. Fuck the Old Testament. However, the ancient Hebrews civilization has been uncovered by many archeologists over the last few centuries which I think is enough proof thqat they lived in Israel (known as Caanan back in the day) for at least 2 thousand years before Christ minimum.

And another thing: You can't put one religion above others and say that this people deserve this land more than others, and then push those who live there aside for the jews to settle down..?

The only reason the Jews left Israel in the first place is because the Roman Empire forced them out in the great Diaspora and Jews have been trying to move back ever since.


defends Israel at any costs, careless of what the rest of the world thinks.

Because the US now has the worlds largest Jewish population and the American Jews are very good at lobbying the government. It honestly doesn't surprise me that Europe in general has always been against Israel, especially when you consider that outside Israel and the US their are only about 1 million Jews currently residing in Europe.

dradeel
05-08-2006, 00:11
Go learn some of the history of the Jewish people because being Jewish is more than just a Religion. It's cultural and ethnic.
I know very well that they have had alot of struggles through history, and for reasons that goes beyond the fact that they have their own religion! Do not underestimate me like that. But later generations can't be held responsible for the tragedies that forfathers have put upon the jewish people. Yes, the holocaust is recent. But if creating a jewish state were to be some kinda repayment to the jewish people, why place it where it was bound to be disagreements. As you said; the muslim world being anti-western happened a long time before making Israel. Even so, they still made it.

And just one thing, and aye, I know it's a silly question to ask ... but if a Jewish state was such a necessity; why haven't all Jews moved there?
It honestly doesn't surprise me that Europe in general has always been against Israel
Europe in general hasn't always been against Israel. We're backing Israel up just like many others, but a bit different. Norway pay tributes to Israel each year. Heavy tributes actually, and so does a lot of european countries, but can't we criticize and disagree with their actions still? UN was lead by Trygve Lie when Israel was made. Norway was more or less in the lead of the creation of a jewish state. And to this day Norway is still all over pretty Israel-friendly. My grandmom is very pro-Israel.

The fact that we were so stupid and sent our jews to Germany during WWII was much based on us being naive and afraid --- trying to avoid being targeted by the Germans. We should of course have done the same as our neighbours. Besides that I can't remember any incidents of "anti-semitism" in Norway...

Khartoun2004
05-08-2006, 02:30
I know very well that they have had alot of struggles through history, and for reasons that goes beyond the fact that they have their own religion!

that's not what I said nor what I meant. I was only pointing out the fact I think the Jewish have earned the right to have a safe place for all Jewish people free from the fear that the rest of world is going to wake up again someday and decide to blame all of their problems on us and try to eradicate all of us again. I know you'll probably say it "wopn't happen again", but guess what history says otherwise.

As you said; the muslim world being anti-western happened a long time before making Israel. Even so, they still made it.

As I said? I do not recall ever saying that. If you are refering to when I said:
yes because the western world is really suffering for it The western world's suffering started long before 1948.
My comments were in no way related to the middle east exclusively and I was being facetious.

And just one thing, and aye, I know it's a silly question to ask ... but if a Jewish state was such a necessity; why haven't all Jews moved there?

95% of the worlds European population that survived the holocaust moved there. Hundreds of American Jews give up their US citizenship in favor of gaining Israeli citizenship under the Israeli Law of Return. Many Jews are afraid to move to Israel because of all the Suicide bombings that happen almost daily there. Also, the Law of Return spacifically says that a person must have at least one grandparent that was Jewish. A lot of people convert and do not have Jewish grandparents and there fore are not considered by Israel to be Jewish by ethnicity and are not granted citizenship. Another reason being that some people just don't have the financial ability to pick up their lives and move to another country even if they wanted to.

Norway pay tributes to Israel each year. Heavy tributes actually, and so does a lot of european countries.

yeah because as you mention later in your post, your country handed over its Jewish population to be Murdered. There is a reason I excluded Denmark and Sweden in my last post. The reason being that the Danes instead of handing over their Jews, sent them to Sweden where they would be safe. Why? Because Sweden didn't hand them over. Jusitification for handing a mass group of people over to be slaughtered like animals because of fear of a tyrannt IS NOT justification! It's essentially accessory to murder. That's why Norway, Germany, Austria, ect have to pay retribution, which I might add is voluntary. It's those governments' way of saying, "Hey sorry for killing your families and almost exterminating your race." :rolleyes:

dradeel
05-08-2006, 03:04
As I said? I do not recall ever saying that. If you are refering to when I said:Quote:
Originally Posted by Khartoun2004
yes because the western world is really suffering for it The western world's suffering started long before 1948.
My comments were in no way related to the middle east exclusively and I was being facetious.
Sorry, then I slightly misunderstood. And I understood you were joking on the first sentence... Your smiley sorted for that. :) But it's a fact that the west is suffering tho, as I did answer in one post. And no, I don't blame Israel for it. But I think that if things were done otherwise after WWII these things wouldn't have happened...
I know you'll probably say it "wopn't happen again", but guess what history says otherwise.
Heh.. No I won't say that. I'd like to! But I won't... After WWI they said "never again", but what happened only a few decades later? Hell on earth... History has proven to be full of surprises, mostly bad ones :/ (now I talked wars tho, but same goes for Jewish history in specific..)
Also, the Law of Return spacifically says that a person must have at least one grandparent that was Jewish. A lot of people convert and do not have Jewish grandparents and there fore are not considered by Israel to be Jewish by ethnicity and are not granted citizenship.
Hmm.. I see.
The reason being that the Danes instead of handing over their Jews, sent them to Sweden where they would be safe. Why? Because Sweden didn't hand them over. Jusitification for handing a mass group of people over to be slaughtered like animals because of fear of a tyrannt IS NOT justification! It's essentially accessory to murder.
Completely true. Couldn't agree more. And it's the biggest shame in Norwegian history. The Norwegian government after the war didn't take that lightly (which is why we were in lead of creating Israel)... but as I also said, it was because the government was being naive. Germany assured Norway that nothing bad were to happen with them. Their demand to the norwegian government were sent before anyone got to know that they were being placed in big camps for execution. And it didn't take long before they had occupied us and could handle that as they wanted themselves anyways. And mind you, many people in Norway did work for the Jews to be sent to Sweden.

And the fact that Norway still pays tributes to Israel is abit more complex than "sorry for exterminating your race", well, I hope...

forre
12-08-2006, 11:32
The draft resolution presented at the U.N. (http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/08/11/un.draft/index.html)

Khartoun2004
12-08-2006, 13:51
I applaud the UN on this draft resolution. It seems fair to me and it requires the lebanese government to step up to the plate and actually control its own territory instead of allowing terrorist groups like Hizbollah do it for them. However, I do not think this resolution will actually come to fruition unless Hizbollah holds up their end of the bargain by returning the captured Israeli soldiers immediately.

haku
19-08-2006, 14:33
While everyone's attention is on Lebanon, Israel has been quietly operating in the West Bank (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5265792.stm) as well. Israel has never been happy with the results of the last elections in Palestinian territories, so Israel has simply decided to "arrest" the elected officials they don't like, how very convenient.
That kind of operations shows that the Palestinian territories have become nothing more than bantustans, territories granted with a fake automomy (the fact that Israel can kidnap and throw in jail *elected* officials with no charges and no trial for an indefinite period of time shows how inexistant that automomy is) which allows Israel to deprive their populations of full citizenship (and use them as a cheap workforce with no rights) while keeping effective control on those territories.


Also, Israel has already violated the ceasefire (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5265934.stm) in Lebanon, but of course the usual double standards apply, Israel can continue the attacks on Lebanon under the 'ceasefire' but Lebanon is not allowed to defend itself.

PowerPuff Grrl
19-08-2006, 16:42
Palestine killed two Israeli soldiers and kidnapped another on June 25. Not to mention that ever since the Gaza pull-out Palestinian militants have actually increased their attacks on Israel.
And ever since the cease-fire Hezbollah has launched 250 Katyusha rockets into Israel.

Double standards indeed, Israel should just chill.

haku
19-08-2006, 17:01
And ever since the cease-fire Hezbollah has launched 250 Katyusha rockets into Israel.I haven't seen that reported anywhere, if a single rocket had landed in Israel after the ceasefire, Israel would have considered it a breach of ceasefire and jumped on the occasion to resume the massive bombing of Lebanon.

PowerPuff Grrl
19-08-2006, 18:17
Obviously you don't know about it, because when I said Israel I actually meant southern Lebanon and when I said it was 250 rockets, I actually meant 10. Get it right this time!
Article (http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_9286.shtml)

Considering that Israeli forces were leaving parts of Southern Lebanon for Lebanese and UN forces to look after, it kind of seemed like a cheap shot from the Hez'. Israel obviously wouldn't retaliate on that, especially when nobody was killed.

forre
19-08-2006, 18:22
Obviously you don't know about it, because when I said Israel I actually meant southern Lebanon and when I said it was 250 rockets, I actually meant 10.
Yes, I've seen the report on CNN. That's correct. The only thing is, I don't remember if it was before the UN resolution was signed or after. Btw, was it signed generally? Lol. Sorry, I've been out of circulation for some time.

freddie
19-08-2006, 20:23
Yes, I've seen the report on CNN. That's correct. The only thing is, I don't remember if it was before the UN resolution was signed or after. Btw, was it signed generally? Lol. Sorry, I've been out of circulation for some time.
It's a general resolution, yes. And those attacks were after the resolution. At the same time the Israeli attacks still ensued as well. So it was a nono from both parties. Silly middle-easterers.

A good friend of mine from Israel pointed out this (http://thefox.dyndns.org/Misc/HowToSolveOurProblem.html) link to me. Amusing. :p

haku
19-08-2006, 20:58
A good friend of mine from Israel pointed out this (http://thefox.dyndns.org/Misc/HowToSolveOurProblem.html) link to me. Amusing. :p
Except that Israel generally does not punch back, it "preemptively" punches because it thinks it might get punch someday. And in the rare cases where Israel does punch back, it gives 1000 punches for one received.

It's a myth that Israel is only retaliating in defense and never starts anything, the IDF and its predecessors Irgun and Lehi have started many attacks back in the days when they needed to conquer territories, now they're whining because the enemy is doing the same thing.
And when Israel expels Arabs from East Jerusalem, West Bank or Golan Heights to make room for Israeli colonists, to what exactly is it punching back there?

Mary-sheccid
20-08-2006, 21:40
god!.. that`s sad!.. i:eek: :grustno: i wanted to have a bit of hope to give them, they have broken my heart, they deserve a better future.

spyretto
20-08-2006, 22:11
yeah Israel is only retaliating in defense indeed, it all depends on the level of the retaliation... Looking to completely destroy a country because two of their soldiers were humiliated by the enemy.
...
...
..
...yeah, it makes a lot of sense.

haku
21-08-2006, 17:00
Pictures of Lebanon (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/06/in_pictures_lebanese_villagers_return_home/html/1.stm) after the Israeli tantrum, from this article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5270118.stm).

haku
23-08-2006, 21:37
Amnesty International (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5276626.stm) agrees that war crimes were committed by Israel in Lebanon, that the use of force was disproportionate, and that civilians were targeted deliberately.
The organization has released satellite pictures showing the massive destruction of entire civilian neighborhoods and villages, the results are similar to good old WWII carpet bombings and have nothing to do with precision targetting.

Rachel
23-08-2006, 22:40
^^^ Well, that's not a surprise at all.

Defending themselves, yeah riiiiiiiiight. :rolleyes:

freddie
24-08-2006, 12:43
Israel had absolutely NOTHING to gain with targeting civilians. 'Nuff said.

Rachel
24-08-2006, 17:34
Then why do it? :rolleyes:

It's all a case of old scores to settle.

freddie
24-08-2006, 18:14
They DIDN'T do it. It was - at worst - gross negligence.Which is not excusable but it's not on purpose either.

Killing civilians on purpose would totally mean shooting themselves in the foot. That's the only thing they have the upper moral hand over from the terrorists. A few killed civilians will bring them no additional satisfaction - all it'll do is turn their western allies against them. Doing that would be political suicide.

haku
24-08-2006, 18:26
Israel had absolutely NOTHING to gain with targeting civilians.
Of course there was something to gain for Israel, massive bombings of civilian areas have been a war strategy since WWII, nothing really new here, the goal was the same as when the Allied flattened Dresde or Hiroshima, to terrify and demoralize the civilian population so it would pressure its leaders and army to surrender to the enemy.

The Israeli army is well trained and equiped with the latest hi-tech gear the US can provide them, so when the Israeli army destroys several square km in a particular civilian area, it's no mistake, this kind of mistakes could happen during WWII when bombs were not guided, but not today, those Israeli bombs went exactly where they were meant to go, on civilians and civilian infrastructures.

The reality is that Israel had absolutely nothing to lose in targeting civilians, neither Israel or the US recognize the International Criminal Court and their armies have total immunity from any war crimes they can commit.

Khartoun2004
24-08-2006, 20:23
A good friend of mine from Israel pointed out this (http://thefox.dyndns.org/Misc/HowToSolveOurProblem.html) link to me. Amusing. :p

:laugh: HAHA that is quite amusing. But so true, Israel definitely would have been destroyed by now if they didn't react to terrorist acts. I really don't understand people that do not seem to understand this very simple fact. If Israel didn't fight, there would be 5.75 million less Jews in the world and that is not acceptable in my book.

haku
24-08-2006, 22:29
Israel definitely would have been destroyed by now if they didn't react to terrorist acts.And if neighboring Arab countries had never fought back, we would have today a Greater Israel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Israel).

Israelis live on conquered lands, and conquest has a price, for the conquerors, and the conquered.

freddie
26-08-2006, 12:58
Of course there was something to gain for Israel, massive bombings of civilian areas have been a war strategy since WWII, nothing really new here, the goal was the same as when the Allied flattened Dresde or Hiroshima, to terrify and demoralize the civilian population so it would pressure its leaders and army to surrender to the enemy.

The Israeli army is well trained and equiped with the latest hi-tech gear the US can provide them, so when the Israeli army destroys several square km in a particular civilian area, it's no mistake, this kind of mistakes could happen during WWII when bombs were not guided, but not today, those Israeli bombs went exactly where they were meant to go, on civilians and civilian infrastructures.

The reality is that Israel had absolutely nothing to lose in targeting civilians, neither Israel or the US recognize the International Criminal Court and their armies have total immunity from any war crimes they can commit.

But of course they had something to lose. Every civilian target they bomb would make the arabs hate them more... every incident has hundreds of potential extremist group recruits who'll either kidnap more soldiers, blow themselves up in Tel Aviv or fire rockets into Israeli territory in the decades to come. Before the attacks began Israeli army threw leaflets on Lebanese territory warning civilians to either stay in their houses or move temporarily because an attack will ensue shortly. That doesn't look like a tactic of a country that'd "target civilians", does it? Then there's a small thing of israel actually targeting (or trying to target) specific military targets (of course there were mistakes made, since it's not exactly easy to target military structures when you don't even know exactly where they are), while Hezbollah made it clear they're shooting blindly. Hitting civilians was actually their desired purpose.

PowerPuff Grrl
28-08-2006, 17:26
And if neighboring Arab countries had never fought back, we would have today a Greater Israel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Israel).

Israelis live on conquered lands, and conquest has a price, for the conquerors, and the conquered.

That can go both ways you know. Greater Syria (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Syria).

But there's only one country that is actively trying to fufill this, considering how much Syria influences Lebanese politics I think I know which country that may be.

haku
01-11-2006, 21:16
According to a poll in Egypt (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6107160.stm), Denmark is Egypt's 2nd worst enemy, right after Israel and before the UK and even the US. :laugh:

haku
09-11-2006, 15:00
The world is no longer really interested in what is going on in Lebanon but the situation continues to be very tense, especially between Israel and UN forces.
Israeli planes keep making 'fake' attacks on German and French troups, to the point recently that French troups armed their missiles and almost fired at Israeli planes.
Israeli pilots are acting like that because they are used to Arab fighters not being able to respond to air attacks, but they should be more careful now, the missiles used by French troups are a bit more sophisticated than katyuasha rockets, they won't miss.
The whole situation is an accident waiting to happen.

BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6131458.stm)

haku
21-11-2006, 17:18
Pierre Gemayel (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6169606.stm) has just been assassinated in Beirut. :none:

haku
20-03-2007, 16:32
Pakistan inaugurates today Gwadar port (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6469725.stm).

Gwadar port is of critical strategic importance, it will become China's western gate for economic but also military matters. China will station in Gwadar a large military fleet (with nuclear capabilities) which will allow China to project its forces in the Middle-East and Africa.

The balance of global powers of the 21st century is slowly taking shape.

haku
25-03-2007, 21:30
Crisis combination in the Middle East

The US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice has flown back to the Middle East in her latest attempt to broker peace in the region.

But with the conflict in Iraq now four years old, prospects of reaching agreements among the various factions in the Middle East appear remoter than ever.

You hear a lot of talk about war in the Middle East at the moment.

There was so much of it when I was in Beirut last month that it started me wondering. Was this what it felt like to be somewhere like Prague in about 1934?

Surrounded by people whose stomachs get tied in knots when they think about the future, caught up in events that they cannot do anything about with the sinking feeling that things may be bad but, by God, they can get much worse.

Before we get too carried away here, let us remember that the Middle East always has something bad going on, so crisis is normal.

So normal, in fact, that human beings are quite good at getting on with their lives despite it.

But I started wondering about Prague or Warsaw or Budapest in 1934 or 1936 because a lot of the people I had been meeting recently across the Middle East think that what is different now is the combination of crises that are raging, bubbling steadily or slowly smouldering.

Mutual fear

Most Israelis I have talked to believe they will have to go to war again with Hezbollah, the Lebanese Shia movement that fought them to a standstill last summer.

They are worried that Arabs might lose their fear of the Israeli army if they do not.

And Hezbollah is backed by Iran, which many Israelis believe would like to eliminate their country.

In Israel, the former Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, has been explicit about it.

He looks at the bombastic anti-Israeli rhetoric of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and says it is now 1938 and Iran is Germany.

That strikes a deep chord in Israel but Arabs I have spoken to are just as concerned about the future, though for different reasons.

Here are a few snapshots from the last month or so.

The Iran question

While I was in Beirut, I spoke to senior people from all the main sectarian groups - Shias, Sunnis, Druze and Christian - and they all shared concerns about what they saw as Israel's aggressive plans.

But they also talked a lot about the risks of another civil war inside Lebanon.

It is now accepted wisdom there that street disturbances in February took the country to within hours of all-out sectarian conflict.

In his elegant appartment overlooking the Mediterranean in Beirut, a well-known politician told me that he thought the outlook across the Middle East was as bad as it had been in his lifetime.

He was also worried about, what he believed, was Iran's desire to get nuclear weapons and how America's methods of trying to stop them could make matters worse.

Iran's nuclear plans, which Tehran says are an entirely peaceful and lawful attempt to generate electricity, alarm conservative Arab leaders.

In Saudi Arabia, a prince - a brother of the king - told me that he had heard an Arab leader saying that once Iran had a bomb, then everyone in the Arab nation should get one too.

He also said he knew how that leader would get the bomb but he would not give names or details.

And then there are the forces of religious conservatism which many secular Middle Easterners see as a cause of conflict.

Impact of Iraq

In Damascus a Western ambassador talked about how members of the secular elite in Syria were blithely assuming that they would not be affected.

"I go to parties here", he said, "and they tell me that Syria is secular and staying that way. Sometimes I think there is a 'fin de siecle' feeling about it all as if it is the end of something."

In Bahrain, a journalist who works for the country's only independent newspaper, told me how she wished the future was secular and feared that it was not.

She was wearing clothes that would have looked good in the fashionable corners of London or Paris but in Bahrain she saw others retreating into their own religious identities and turning their backs on people who were different.

Much of the fear of the future comes from the impact of the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

It has set off a series of shock waves that will rumble around the region for a generation at least.

Two of them are already urgent: the exodus of Iraqi refugees, which is the biggest movement of people in the Middle East since the Palestinian refugee crisis after Israel was established in 1948, and the sectarian war in Iraq which is increasing tension in Shia and Sunni communities from Lebanon to Pakistan.

This survey is very unscientific and I have not got room to go into the fears that Iranians have about the intentions of the US and its friends or Palestinian problems, or any of the other crises that are on the horizon or here already.

I hope the future is not as dark for the Middle East as it was in Europe in the 1930s, but for most of the 20th Century, conflict in Europe poisoned the rest of the world.

Seven years into this new century, the Middle East is showing every sign of doing the same.

Jeremy Bowen
BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/6485947.stm)

freddie
26-03-2007, 18:02
Hehe. Nice analysis. However Europe in the 1930s was much more powerful and influential to the rest of the world than the Middle East is now (weren't it for the oil the whole region would be a pretty insignificant, actually).

I also think conditions will stabilize a bit once the mighty persian Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is ousted from power. Right now the Iran problem is much more dangerous on a global scale than secterian violence in Iraq.

haku
27-03-2007, 04:22
Indeed, i don't think a large war in the Middle-East could evolve into WWIII, the European wars of the first half of the 20th century evolved into world wars because European countries had colonies all over the planet and extensive systems of alliances, Middle-Eastern countries have no such things.

That being said, i do think that a large scale war in the Middle-East is highly probable in the first half of this century, there are just too many people who want it.

First there are Shias and Sunnis who are literally at each other's throats and would welcome a general conflict to settle things out, there's also the century old ethnic rivalry between Persians and Arabs which is climaxing again, and even Israel would welcome a large scale regional war which would allow it to complete the annexation of the occupied territories (and expulsion of the remaining Arab inhabitants).
The Kurds could also benefit from a large scale conflict to create an independant Kurdistan.

The Middle-East has many problems, but peaceful means have only stalled those problems without solving anything, and just like Europe in the 1930s, war seems to be the inevitable outcome.

freddie
27-03-2007, 15:23
Israel as the most economically evolved country in the Middle East would hardly welcome a wide-spread conflict. It would to horrid things to their otherwise bustling financial affairs (the stock market wouldn't recover for years, at least). Plus Israelis are pretty much used to a western life-style by now (if you don't count an occasional suicide-bomber here or there). I don't think they'd be prepared to live in shelters again just to gain a few square kilometres of the holy land.

haku
27-03-2007, 22:41
Well, Israel went to war against Lebanon last year simply over a few captured soldiers, so it obviously doesn't take much for Israel to go to war. Securing the West Bank once and for all would definitely be a good enough reason to go to war. And i don't think Israel is really bothered by possible economic consequences because they know the US will compensate no matter what, and a few difficult years is a price worth paying for a decisive war.

Israeli leaders and Sunni Arab leaders (those from the Arabic peninsula) know that the Jewish colonization of the West Bank is now too advanced for it to ever become a Palestinian state, it's just no longer possible. Both sides ask for impossible things to keep the status quo, Israel asks for the end of the Palestinian resistance, which it knows will never happen, Arab leaders ask for Israel to go back to the 1967 borders, which they know will never happen, the status quo prevents any concrete talks about a Palestinian state which they know can no longer be created.

Sunni Arab leaders have come to terms with the loss of Palestine, the loss of the holly muslim sites is hard to swallow, but they know they're lost, Israel knows it'll have to annex the West Bank, and Arab leaders know they'll have to let it go, both sides just need an excuse for it to happen. It can't happen in peace times because it would be too humiliating for Arab leaders and too much of a breach of international regulations for Israel, but in war times… anything goes.

The current increased tension between Sunnis and Shias and Persians and Arabs offer a possible exit to that status quo, war times create opportunities for unnatural alliances, and the most likely unnatural alliances in a large Middle-Eastern conflict are a Shia Arabs + Shia Persians alliance on one side against a Sunni Arabs + Israel alliance on the other side.

The Shia alliance is a logical one, the religious bond is currently stronger than the ancestral ethnic rivalry between Semitic Arabs and Indo-European Persians.
The Sunni/Jewish alliance is more unnatural but also logical in the current circumstances, first of all because they share a common enemy, the Shias. Sunni Arabs want to put a stop to the Shia expansion, they are much more worried about that than about Israel, and Israel main enemies (Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah) are either Shias or Shia sponsored.

And that's where Israel and Sunni Arabs can find an excuse to get rid of the Palestinian problem. In a general Shia/Sunni conflict, it will be easy for Sunni Arab leaders to point out how Palestinan groups are siding with the Shia enemy. That gives the opportunity for Israel to annex the occupied territories and for Sunni Arabs to let it happen.

In the aftermath of the war, there are no longer any Palestinians in Palestine, the ocupied territories are annexed to Israel, the neighboring Sunni Arabs are at peace with Israel, and the line between Sunnis and Shias is probably somewhere in what used to be Iraq.