Thread: Israel-Lebanon conflict

Originally Posted by Dogboy182

You english is pretty good =)

спасибо

your * :P oops.

Догбой, а кому принадлежит эта бандитская рожа на твоём аватаре

Well its mine ofcourse! On one of my many vacations to the steppes of kazakhstan.

Originally Posted by Dogboy182

your * :P oops.

Догбой, а кому принадлежит эта бандитская рожа на твоём аватаре

Well its mine ofcourse! On one of my many vacations to the steppes of kazakhstan.

Nice pic!
Next time you are there take a pic of medeo.

What does здрасте mean in your signature?

Originally Posted by basurero

Как россияне относятся к этой теме?

It is so popular, it makes me regret that I am not an arms dealer.

Originally Posted by basurero

What does здрасте mean in your signature?

I dont even know if its a real word. Its just a shorter, (cooler) more impolite way to say Здраствуйте (did i mention easier?).

Ive only ever really heard it in songs, or teenagers talking. But hey, songs, and teenagers are cool. So, i guess its cool.

Здрасте здрасте, я ваш догбой
поверьте мне, я ж не голубой...

Originally Posted by Dogboy182

Originally Posted by basurero

What does здрасте mean in your signature?

I dont even know if its a real word. Its just a shorter, (cooler) more impolite way to say Здраствуйте (did i mention easier?).

Ive only ever really heard it in songs, or teenagers talking. But hey, songs, and teenagers are cool. So, i guess its cool.

Здрасте здрасте, я ваш догбой
поверьте мне, я ж не голубой...

he he he

Ну, здрасте, приехали!!!

hey i guess alware says it too!

So i was right after all, cool people say it.

Жаль что уехал так рано из радного казахстана...
я шас живу в маленькой области, которая называется "Вобля".

Люди всегда смеются надо мной, когда узнавают я и откуда... Но я говорю в ответ... "Ну что ***".

Its just a river

Originally Posted by uno

And please don't say that Israel is interested in conquering Lebanon's territory. Also, keep in mind that Israel in the past has forced its own citizens out of large territories of land in a gesture for peace.

Well, I don't think Gaza counts as a large territory. With its 1.5 million or so Palestinian inhabitants, it was total fantasy to think that Israeli settlement there could ever achieve anything (not unless the long term intention was to expel the existing population into Egypt or something like that). So I assume you're talking about the Sinai area. Well, that did secure peace with Egypt and proves that a "land for peace" deal can work, and remember Egypt was Israel's greatest enemy in earlier wars. If someone suggested in the 1950s or 60s that Egypt would accept Israel's existence, they would probably have been dismissed as mad.

As regards Lebanon, I don't think anyone is suggesting Israel wants to conquer its territory but clearly Israel has a different attitude to the West Bank. The course of the wall and the expansion of settlements prove that. And ultimately all these conflicts are interconnected, An outbreak of violence on one front can trigger clashes on another. There has to be a comprehensive peace deal for the Middle East that addresses all outstanding issues, including Syria, Lebanon and the Palestinians.

Israel might say that they have no partner to negotiate with, and it's true that while Hamas refuses to accept the existence of Israel and to renounce violence there is little hope of peace. But Israel's determination to continue building settlements and annexing land on the West Bank is also a huge obstacle to agreement. Locking up 2.5 million Palestinians behind walls into pockets of land in the West Bank, enveloping them inside the state of Israel but without any voice in that state is insane. It's also immoral and totally unworkable.

And lastly, you don't have to expand settlements and deny Palestinians their own state in order to keep Israel secure. Any agreement could still see Israeli forces along the Jordan valley to ensure no weapons or rockets got through to those opposed to the peace.

I think the reason why the wall makes inroads into the West Bank is just to keep Jewish settlements on the Israeli side of the wall. Israel is small, yes, but it has lots of space, it is nowhere near full. Israel doesn't currently have any need for more land. The only reason it would want to take extra land is for buffer zones. As soon as Israel pulled out of Gaza, millitants started firing rockets out into Israel.

The original plan the British came up with was to divide Palestine 50-50 between the Jews and Arabs, with Jerusalem as a UN adiminstered multi-faith city. The Jews agreed, but the Arabs said they wanted all or nothing.

Also, we must remember that after the Arabs invaded Israel from all sides in the 60s, Israel pushed them all back and captured huge amounts of land (like the Sinai Peninsula which is bigger than Israel itself). But Israel gave it all back (except the Golan heights, which was to act as a buffer zone between Israel and Syria).

I do not particularly agree with what Israel is doing right now, but Israel is in a difficult and unique position. It is surrounded by countries that hate it and want it destroyed. Eygpt officially does not, but the people of Eygpt do. If Israel seems weak to countries like Iran and Syria, they'll try and invade or bomb it. What Israel is doing at the moment is sending a message to Iran, Syria, and everyone else in the region, that they don't take no sh*t from anyone. Of course, thousands of civillians on both sides have take the direct consequences.

Originally Posted by SummerKiss

Where did you read all that about muhammed??? It seems to be a special Karan.

Well my little possum, one can find everything one wants about Koran, Hadith and Mohammed here:-
http://mb-soft.com/believe/txo/islam.htm
http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate/index.html
http://www.prophetofdoom.net/
http://www.news.faithfreedom.org/index. ... Q&id_cat=3

Originally Posted by DDT

Originally Posted by Kamion

That is precisely the argument I dislike the most.

That's because this is where you lose the argument

You

Well if you think about it Kamion, there really are no rules in war. War is the proof that, on Earth, there are no enforcable rules.

It is only in recent history that anyone gives a hoot about "collateral damage". Take WWII for example. Civilian deaths were more or less ignored. ie Bombing of London, Dresden, Berlin, Pearl Harbour, Darwin, Hiroshima.

Perhaps it could even be said that when civilians know that they will get killed too, along with their armies, they will be less likely to start a war in the first place!

No problem for me: with the victim and against the opressor. Yesterderday the opressor was Hitler, against Hitler. Nobody wants to know which was the behaviour of every country towards the Jews when Hitler was in the power (USA, Switzerland, as well as many other countries have reasons for not speaking about it); after WWII they accord (out of their bad conscience) being splendid giving them Palestine, why not Arizona, Baden-Wurtenberg; Sicily or Scotland ?. It is easy make charity with other's pocket. From then on the victim becames executioner. And every day more.

One thing is Jewish people and other completely different is the State of Israel, as well as a grandfather can be a very honest person and the grandson a delinquent, and v.v. As for 'the terrorist'; it is a word who indicates a delinquent if he loses and a hero if he wins. Terrorist is whoever fights against me. Terrorist where called in their era and by the occupant, of course, the americans who opposed with weapons to the presence of Spanish power in America, now they are heroes; the Spaniards who opposed to the presence of Napoleon in Spain, now they are heroes ; the Jews who opposed to the presence of British power in Palestine, now they are heroes. the French who opposed to presence of German troops in France; now they are heroes. the Russians who fighted in civil dress against occupier; etc, etc.

Originally Posted by SummerKiss

Originally Posted by Kim_2320

Originally Posted by SummerKiss

Hundreds of innocent people die in both countries but it seems that world leaders are not going to stop their geopolitical games and will continue that cruel bloodshed.

With whom are you? Whould be interesting to know all kinds of opinion.

There really should be change in the Middle East. I'm tired of hearing about bombings and shootings happening on the news. Why couldn't everyone just live in peace? It's way easier. But no, people are too greedy and selfish to realize it.

Because people are fighting not for those kidnapped soldiers and even not with terrorism, they are fighting for land and authority in the region.

Moreover, if Israel wants just to protect itself from Hezbolluh terrorists why the hell they bombed the only one international airport, roads, bridges and fuel reservoirs that led to the ecological disaster in Lebanon!!???!!!

And finally, this is not the question of religion. 40% of lebanese are chrisitian.

Yeah, maybe you're right. But I'm mostly talking about the US wars.

Originally Posted by Vladi

No problem for me: with the victim and against the opressor. Yesterderday the opressor was Hitler, against Hitler. Nobody wants to know which was the behaviour of every country towards the Jews when Hitler was in the power (USA, Switzerland, as well as many other countries have reasons for not speaking about it); after WWII they accord (out of their bad conscience) being splendid giving them Palestine, why not Arizona, Baden-Wurtenberg; Sicily or Scotland ?. It is easy make charity with other's pocket. From then on the victim becames executioner. And every day more.

One thing is Jewish people and other completely different is the State of Israel, as well as a grandfather can be a very honest person and the grandson a delinquent, and v.v. As for 'the terrorist'; it is a word who indicates a delinquent if he loses and a hero if he wins. Terrorist is whoever fights against me. Terrorist where called in their era and by the occupant, of course, the americans who opposed with weapons to the presence of Spanish power in America, now they are heroes; the Spaniards who opposed to the presence of Napoleon in Spain, now they are heroes ; the Jews who opposed to the presence of British power in Palestine, now they are heroes. the French who opposed to presence of German troops in France; now they are heroes. the Russians who fighted in civil dress against occupier; etc, etc.

Jews used to live and at the time lived in the area that became Israel. There was once a Jewish civilisation there. So saying "Why not give them land in Europe or America" doesn't really work. Also Israel is a very small piece of land with very few natural resources, (no oil etc.)

The Arabs don't really care about the land itself, what they care about is Jews living in there region. It's not because of what Israel is doing in the Gaza Strip or West Bank, or what it is doing in Lebannon now. All they care about is that they are Jews and in "their region", and they want them out. As soon as the State of Israel was declared the Arab countries invaded.

Originally Posted by Vladi

Terrorist is whoever fights against me. Terrorist where called in their era and by the occupant, of course, the americans who opposed with weapons to the presence of Spanish power in America, now they are heroes; the Spaniards who opposed to the presence of Napoleon in Spain, now they are heroes ; the Jews who opposed to the presence of British power in Palestine, now they are heroes. the French who opposed to presence of German troops in France; now they are heroes. the Russians who fighted in civil dress against occupier; etc, etc.

You're being wrong in definition of terrorism.
It's the form of POWER based on POLITICAL violence. The word Terror means fear. It is the policy of inspiring fear in people to achieve your goals. That needs to be distinguished from military action which goal is to eliminate enemy activities. Terrorists bombs schools and bus stops, but rocket attacks of Hezbollah resembles more an aggression that terrorism. Indeed the attacks come from another country.
Neither terrorism label can be sticked on Israel for it's just strikes back. The conflict has nothing to do with terrorism. It's just a simple war.

Originally Posted by Ramil

Originally Posted by Vladi

Terrorist is whoever fights against me. Terrorist where called in their era and by the occupant, of course, the americans who opposed with weapons to the presence of Spanish power in America, now they are heroes; the Spaniards who opposed to the presence of Napoleon in Spain, now they are heroes ; the Jews who opposed to the presence of British power in Palestine, now they are heroes. the French who opposed to presence of German troops in France; now they are heroes. the Russians who fighted in civil dress against occupier; etc, etc.

You're being wrong in definition of terrorism.
It's the form of POWER based on POLITICAL violence. The word Terror means fear. It is the policy of inspiring fear in people to achieve your goals. That needs to be distinguished from military action which goal is to eliminate enemy activities. Terrorists bombs schools and bus stops, but rocket attacks of Hezbollah resembles more an aggression that terrorism. Indeed the attacks come from another country.
Neither terrorism label can be sticked on Israel for it's just strikes back. The conflict has nothing to do with terrorism. It's just a simple war.

I am not so sure.

Israel is striking millitary targets. The problem is Hizbullah is woven into Lebanese society, so to hit Hizbullah, you have to hit residential areas.

Hizbullah on the other hand are just trying to kill Israeli civillians by firing rockets into Israeli towns and cities.

Also, Hizbullah is not acting on behalf of Lebannon officially, and is therefore considered to be carrying out terrorist actions.

Originally Posted by TATY

I think the reason why the wall makes inroads into the West Bank is just to keep Jewish settlements on the Israeli side of the wall. Israel is small, yes, but it has lots of space, it is nowhere near full. Israel doesn't currently have any need for more land. The only reason it would want to take extra land is for buffer zones.

Yes, it's hard to see why Israel needs to develop so many new communities in a disputed area when there's plenty of land within Israel itself. I think there's more to it than just buffer zones though. There is a strong ideologically driven movement within Israel that sees all of the West Bank as rightfully belonging to the Jewish state. It has pushed for and succeeded in establishing numerous settlements throughout the West Bank since that territory was captured in the 1967 war. These settlements necessitate a significant military presence to protect them and result in a major impact on Palestinian life through checkpoints, delays and travel restrictions etc. This only fuels more resentment and bitterness towards the Israeli presence among Palestinians. Also, the settlers are often very hardline and extreme in their views and some have carried out attacks on Palestinian civilians in the past. All in all, it doesn't seem like a good policy for promoting peace and harmony given past history!

Originally Posted by TATY

As soon as Israel pulled out of Gaza, millitants started firing rockets out into Israel.

Yes, this was wrong and doesn't help the Palestinian cause one bit. But the shelling of civilians on a beach in northern Gaza a few weeks ago didn't help either. I believe that was the reason Hamas gave for breaking its truce.

Originally Posted by TATY

The original plan the British came up with was to divide Palestine 50-50 between the Jews and Arabs, with Jerusalem as a UN adiminstered multi-faith city. The Jews agreed, but the Arabs said they wanted all or nothing.

The Arabs should have accepted that but regardless of what should have happened in the past there's still an issue to be addressed in the present. Israel acquired not just more land in the 67 war but also a large Palestinian population. What is it going to do now? Keep them under military rule forever? Give them the same rights as Israeli Arabs and make them full citizens of Israel? or give them their own state? If they are to have their own state then it should be a real viable state and not some fragmented entity encircled by walls and Israeli settlements.

Originally Posted by TATY

Also, we must remember that after the Arabs invaded Israel from all sides in the 60s, Israel pushed them all back and captured huge amounts of land (like the Sinai Peninsula which is bigger than Israel itself). But Israel gave it all back (except the Golan heights, which was to act as a buffer zone between Israel and Syria).

Israel was willing to give up most of the Golan Heights for a peace deal with Syria but talks reached an impasse over control of the right bank of Lake Tiberias, I think. There are settlements in the Golan Heights as well but no large Arab population (most fled during the war).

Originally Posted by TATY

I do not particularly agree with what Israel is doing right now, but Israel is in a difficult and unique position. It is surrounded by countries that hate it and want it destroyed. Eygpt officially does not, but the people of Eygpt do. If Israel seems weak to countries like Iran and Syria, they'll try and invade or bomb it. What Israel is doing at the moment is sending a message to Iran, Syria, and everyone else in the region, that they don't take no sh*t from anyone. Of course, thousands of civillians on both sides have take the direct consequences.

Yeah, Israel is in a difficult position with people like Ahmadinejad saying the crazy things he does but it's not helping matters the way it treats the Palestinians. And every injustice that ensues from that unresolved conflict is beamed around the Arab world increasing the animosity towards Israel among the public in countries like Egypt. If the Palestinian issue had been settled the same time as the peace with Egypt, there mightn't be the daily diet of shootings and attacks that we have today and many moderate Muslims might have come to accept Israel. I mean there are Muslim Israeli citizens who live quite happily there so it shouldn't be impossible.

Originally Posted by TATY

Originally Posted by Ramil

Originally Posted by Vladi

Terrorist is whoever fights against me. Terrorist where called in their era and by the occupant, of course, the americans who opposed with weapons to the presence of Spanish power in America, now they are heroes; the Spaniards who opposed to the presence of Napoleon in Spain, now they are heroes ; the Jews who opposed to the presence of British power in Palestine, now they are heroes. the French who opposed to presence of German troops in France; now they are heroes. the Russians who fighted in civil dress against occupier; etc, etc.

You're being wrong in definition of terrorism.
It's the form of POWER based on POLITICAL violence. The word Terror means fear. It is the policy of inspiring fear in people to achieve your goals. That needs to be distinguished from military action which goal is to eliminate enemy activities. Terrorists bombs schools and bus stops, but rocket attacks of Hezbollah resembles more an aggression that terrorism. Indeed the attacks come from another country.
Neither terrorism label can be sticked on Israel for it's just strikes back. The conflict has nothing to do with terrorism. It's just a simple war.

I am not so sure.

Israel is striking millitary targets. The problem is Hizbullah is woven into Lebanese society, so to hit Hizbullah, you have to hit residential areas.

Hizbullah on the other hand are just trying to kill Israeli civillians by firing rockets into Israeli towns and cities.

Also, Hizbullah is not acting on behalf of Lebannon officially, and is therefore considered to be carrying out terrorist actions.

If government cannot control its land/population that means that its power is weak.
The core of the discussion is WHY Hezbollah is marking civilian targets? To inspire fear in Jews? I really doubt it. Who pays them? And WHY?