Israel: "Act of War" - Page 6

TheFatKidDeath · 07-30-2006, 01:09 PM

The Israeli military strikes on Lebanon have proved to be extremely effective -

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/28/wo...t/28arabs.html

and these latest precision strikes can only weaken Hezbollah:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,206259,00.html

tau_neutrino · 07-30-2006, 03:33 PM

And yet the IDF reportedly warned the citizens there to leave, repeatedly. Sad for both sides, especially Hizballah if they actually were hiding rockets there.

As much as I would like a cease-fire to stop the killing, in the long run it is probably best for the long-term interests of both nations if Israel is successful in weakening Hizballah's presence. The populace is most likely going to hate Israel even more anyway due to their media bias and lack of education unless significant reform is made.

I'm surprised that the Lebanese PM hasn't ordered his army to cooperate with the IDF. It would probably reduce civilian casualties and accelerate the removal of the terrorists.

Steeler · 07-30-2006, 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tau_neutrino

The populace is most likely going to hate Israel even more anyway due to their media bias and lack of education...

And the fact that, you know, Israel is dropping bombs on them. If Canada were calling in airstikes on my hometown to clear out Quebequois Rebels, I'd be pretty pissed no matter where I got my degree.

Wulfyn · 07-30-2006, 08:19 PM

I'm all for the fight against terror. I understand the frustration of being fired upon by a militia that uses human screens to prevent you using your full force back upon them.

However I do not think for a second that firing upon a civilian population and then shrugging deaths off as not your fault as "they were warned to leave" is aceptible, and I fully believe that it is testament to war crimes. Israel have bombed the exit routes, fire upon vehicles travelling, and are fully aware that the Hezbollah militants are not allowing civilians to leave or else they lose their protection.

I'm not saying Hezbollah are not to blame - they clearly need to be prevented from being able to undertake violent actions upon anyone. But for Israel to uncaringly take the lives of innocent women and children is pathetic. For the US and UK not to have called out Israel for an immediate ceasefire is shocking.

**Trooper** · 07-30-2006, 08:29 PM

why would the US have called for a cease fire? Israel is doing exactly what needs to be done. Yeah they are killing civilians but you gotta look at this from Israel's side, Hez has been killing their citizens out right for years and no one has said anything. The first time in Years that Israel has stepped up and said enough is enough, people start bitching about Israel is not being fair. Give me a break. To the Israeli's those people are the enemy, and who is to say that Hez isn't claiming those "civilian" deaths when they are actually Hez deaths, its all about semantics. Now dont think that im all for the killing of them, thats not it. Im just sick of people complaining about Israels actions

Just wait for the almighty UN to step up and try to take action.....pfft

tau_neutrino · 07-30-2006, 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steeler

And the fact that, you know, Israel is dropping bombs on them. If Canada were calling in airstikes on my hometown to clear out Quebequois Rebels, I'd be pretty pissed no matter where I got my degree.

Yes, sorry if that wasn't made explicit in my post.

Peace is in the hands of the leaders of the region who should rationally analyze the situation and address the root cause(s).

**CingularDuality** · 07-30-2006, 10:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wulfyn

I'm all for the fight against terror. I understand the frustration of being fired upon by a militia that uses human screens to prevent you using your full force back upon them.

However I do not think for a second that firing upon a civilian population and then shrugging deaths off as not your fault as "they were warned to leave" is aceptible, and I fully believe that it is testament to war crimes. Israel have bombed the exit routes, fire upon vehicles travelling, and are fully aware that the Hezbollah militants are not allowing civilians to leave or else they lose their protection.

I'm not saying Hezbollah are not to blame - they clearly need to be prevented from being able to undertake violent actions upon anyone. But for Israel to uncaringly take the lives of innocent women and children is pathetic. For the US and UK not to have called out Israel for an immediate ceasefire is shocking.

This post exemplifies the attitude that technology has brought to warfare. And I suppose that it goes in cycles.

For a long time, killing people in warfare was a very specific and personal thing, you had to use your bare hands. Then came rocks, where you could do it at a distance. Then swords made it easier to close with and get up close and personal again. Then bows came along. Then black powder, and although things were relatively distant, you still saw who you killed. Cannons with high explosives and grape shot changed that, however, and during the US Civil War, it's estimated that the cannon cockers that never really saw their victims were the most efficient due to their detachment. Rockets, advanced artillery and aerial bombardment made it even easier. Now, with the pervasive media, we're back to having the deaths up close and personal, in a way.

Carpet bombing entire cities was once acceptable as a means of getting your enemy to submit. Burning villages was, too. I don't think that cromagnum had the means of blowing up each others caves, but if they could, I bet they would've done it...

Sure, civilian deaths suck, but it's part of war. It's a part of life. And life's not fair, don't you know?

xTYBALTx · 07-31-2006, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CingularDuality

This post exemplifies the attitude that technology has brought to warfare. And I suppose that it goes in cycles.... Carpet bombing entire cities was once acceptable as a means of getting your enemy to submit.

First off, I apologize for the massive cut I made from your post, and I certainly do not mean any disrespect in doing so. I think all of your points are valid and reasonable.

Secondly, I think it's important to note that many people found the carpet bombing of entire cities in WWII extremely objectionable. Even Air Force General Curtis LeMay is now infamous for having said 'We were acting as war criminals.' I believe that carpet bombing was only acceptable in WWII because several nations were engaged in "total war" - almost a fight to the death, if you will. No first world nation has experienced a total war since, so it makes perfect sense that the carpet bombing of cities would be objected to by many people. We should also note that Israel, right now, is also not engaged in a total war. Both sides, Hezbollah and Israel, will emerge from the conflict in good health.

xTYBALTx · 07-31-2006, 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Economist

The assault and kidnapping of Israeli soldiers by Hezbollah] was, as Israel complains, an unprovoked attack on its sovereign territory. Israel says the timing - three days before the G8 summit in St Petersburg - was no coincidence, that Iran was using Hezbollah to deflect attention from its fishy nuclear program. An equally plausible explanation is that the was is the product of a mistake.

In launching his raid Mr Nasrallah was in fact doing nothing new. In recent years, Hezbollah has mounted several similar raids into Israel. It got away with them, even when Israel was led by Ehud Barak and Ariel Sharon, tough prime ministers who had been war heroes too. Their reactions were astonishingly mild. The reason for this, as Mr Nasrallah constanlty boasted, was his arsenal of around 12,000 Iranian and Syrian rockets and missiles. With these as a deterrent, Mr Nasrallah felt free to pursue an intermitent cross-border war against his much stronger neighbour, piling up prestige for resisting the Zionist "occupier"...

...This time, too, Mr Nasrallah may have expected the usual tokenistic response. If so, he miscalculated. Shortly before the Helbollah raid carried away two Israeli soldiers, the Palestinian Hamas movement had mounted an equally daring raid into Israel from the Gaaza Strip, killing two soldiers and nabbing another. Pehaps precisely because his non-military background required him to look strong, Israel's new prime minister, Ehud Olmert, decided that this double humiliation was more than he could survive or Israel can bear. So he has chosen to go to war.

Great small cut from the July 28th issue of The Economist. Buy it if you want to read more.

**leejo** · 07-31-2006, 12:14 PM

Bah the Economist is biased. I question their methodology. I recommend that everyone ignore it. Don't read the Economist!!!

xTYBALTx · 07-31-2006, 12:17 PM

I posted here? I don't remember posting here.

**leejo** · 07-31-2006, 12:18 PM

Nothing to see here. Don't read the Economist. Keep moving.

**CingularDuality** · 07-31-2006, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xTYBALTx

We should also note that Israel, right now, is also not engaged in a total war. Both sides, Hezbollah and Israel, will emerge from the conflict in good health.

Let's also note that, well, Israel is NOT CARPETBOMBING!

Just because they're not using million dollar smart bombs does NOT mean that they're dropping bombs indiscriminately. My point was that war is hell and that our high tech battles of late have spoiled us.

Steeler · 07-31-2006, 12:56 PM

If they're hitting UN outposts after recieving warnings not to, and blowing up residential complexes full of women and children, then IMO they are bombing rather indiscriminately. Or at least negligently. To write these deaths off as simply broken eggs when the promised omelette is watery and ill-defined is morally corrupt. This idea of a "lasting peace only found beyond war" is a dangerous and almost always flawed concept.

Edit: Pre-empt - Yes, I know that Hezbollah lobbing rockets into Haifa is also morally corrupt. That's not the point. Two wrongs do not make a right.

**leejo** · 07-31-2006, 01:03 PM

Yeah but sitting there doing nothing while a wrong is raining down on your city is just stupid. What course of action do you suggest the good people of Israel adopt?

07-30-2006, 01:09 PM	#76 (permalink)
TheFatKidDeath Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Santa Monica, CA Age: 39 Posts: 2,799	Israel: "Act of War" The Israeli military strikes on Lebanon have proved to be extremely effective - http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/28/wo...t/28arabs.html and these latest precision strikes can only weaken Hezbollah: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,206259,00.html

07-30-2006, 03:33 PM	#77 (permalink)
tau_neutrino Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: San Diego, CA Age: 26 Posts: 1,094	Re: Israel: "Act of War" And yet the IDF reportedly warned the citizens there to leave, repeatedly. Sad for both sides, especially Hizballah if they actually were hiding rockets there. As much as I would like a cease-fire to stop the killing, in the long run it is probably best for the long-term interests of both nations if Israel is successful in weakening Hizballah's presence. The populace is most likely going to hate Israel even more anyway due to their media bias and lack of education unless significant reform is made. I'm surprised that the Lebanese PM hasn't ordered his army to cooperate with the IDF. It would probably reduce civilian casualties and accelerate the removal of the terrorists. __________________ TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:

07-30-2006, 08:19 PM	#79 (permalink)
Wulfyn Join Date: May 2005 Location: Norwich, UK Age: 29 Posts: 4,236	Re: Israel: "Act of War" I'm all for the fight against terror. I understand the frustration of being fired upon by a militia that uses human screens to prevent you using your full force back upon them. However I do not think for a second that firing upon a civilian population and then shrugging deaths off as not your fault as "they were warned to leave" is aceptible, and I fully believe that it is testament to war crimes. Israel have bombed the exit routes, fire upon vehicles travelling, and are fully aware that the Hezbollah militants are not allowing civilians to leave or else they lose their protection. I'm not saying Hezbollah are not to blame - they clearly need to be prevented from being able to undertake violent actions upon anyone. But for Israel to uncaringly take the lives of innocent women and children is pathetic. For the US and UK not to have called out Israel for an immediate ceasefire is shocking. __________________

07-30-2006, 08:29 PM	#80 (permalink)
Trooper Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: In my wifes house......if she says i can Age: 25 Posts: 8,894	Re: Israel: "Act of War" why would the US have called for a cease fire? Israel is doing exactly what needs to be done. Yeah they are killing civilians but you gotta look at this from Israel's side, Hez has been killing their citizens out right for years and no one has said anything. The first time in Years that Israel has stepped up and said enough is enough, people start bitching about Israel is not being fair. Give me a break. To the Israeli's those people are the enemy, and who is to say that Hez isn't claiming those "civilian" deaths when they are actually Hez deaths, its all about semantics. Now dont think that im all for the killing of them, thats not it. Im just sick of people complaining about Israels actions Just wait for the almighty UN to step up and try to take action.....pfft __________________ that sounds like a good idea trooper. -Vulcan

07-31-2006, 12:14 PM	#85 (permalink)
leejo Join Date: Sep 2003 Age: 39 Posts: 7,839	Re: Israel: "Act of War" Bah the Economist is biased. I question their methodology. I recommend that everyone ignore it. Don't read the Economist!!!

07-31-2006, 12:17 PM	#86 (permalink)
xTYBALTx Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 3,919	Re: Israel: "Act of War" I posted here? I don't remember posting here. __________________ A policy of freedom for the individual is the only truly progressive policy. -F.A. Hayek "$250,000 a year won't get me to Central Park West."

07-31-2006, 12:18 PM	#87 (permalink)
leejo Join Date: Sep 2003 Age: 39 Posts: 7,839	Re: Israel: "Act of War" Nothing to see here. Don't read the Economist. Keep moving.

07-31-2006, 12:56 PM	#89 (permalink)
Steeler Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Taxachusetts Age: 30 Posts: 2,952	Re: Israel: "Act of War" If they're hitting UN outposts after recieving warnings not to, and blowing up residential complexes full of women and children, then IMO they are bombing rather indiscriminately. Or at least negligently. To write these deaths off as simply broken eggs when the promised omelette is watery and ill-defined is morally corrupt. This idea of a "lasting peace only found beyond war" is a dangerous and almost always flawed concept. Edit: Pre-empt - Yes, I know that Hezbollah lobbing rockets into Haifa is also morally corrupt. That's not the point. Two wrongs do not make a right. __________________

07-31-2006, 01:03 PM	#90 (permalink)
leejo Join Date: Sep 2003 Age: 39 Posts: 7,839	Re: Israel: "Act of War" Yeah but sitting there doing nothing while a wrong is raining down on your city is just stupid. What course of action do you suggest the good people of Israel adopt?

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Time to get real, America!	Magnum50	The Sandbox	81	10-04-2006 11:38 AM
Why does Israel fight so hard? (This thread is for photos, not debate.)	CingularDuality	Pictures & Screenshots	23	08-30-2006 06:26 PM
The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy	AMosely	The Sandbox	30	03-23-2006 05:23 PM
HAMAS wins?	SmokingTarpan	The Sandbox	67	02-15-2006 01:51 PM
Moving Israel	Trooper	The Sandbox	2	12-09-2005 12:52 PM

Sponsored links

Sponsored links

Sponsored links

Sponsored links