Israel and Lebanon

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

toys thrown from pram / playground rhetoric.

Perhaps you should take a leaf from Mr Olmert's book and just give it up as a lost cause?

Just to be clear, I wasn't accusing you of "lying" but I find it rather, shall we say, "curious" that you were not as strong an advocate of diplomacy immediately after the soldiers were kidnapped.

Is it the case that diplomacy in the middle east is only an option in the face of international outrage and an aknowledgement that stated objectives are entirely unattainable by the means proposed?

[Siuko]

It is no wonder that all these wars and all the killing goes on in this world for whatever reason.

Even something as small as two poeple on a forum causes an escalation between them becuase they disagree about something or how it has been worded. If this happens here then how can we even begin to expect people not to escalate matters when it comes to religous beliefs, land, money etc?

Until we all can step beyond our own small opinions and see the world as a whole then none of this will stop. (I am guessing with human beings as they are and having such ego driven opinions of themselves it will never stop).

[hatedbythemail]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Sto...851746,00.html

[basa]

Originally Posted by hatedbythemail

http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Sto...851746,00.html

Well bully for them ! The same thing happens almost daily somewhere in the world without the Guardian's bells and whistles applause.

As I recall New York, London and Manchester.

Oh yes .. nearly forgot .. Israel too !

[Chris]

That article in the Grauniad is absolutely unbelievable. Quite aside from what anyone may think about Israel's actions, Hezbollah is a terrorist organisation. For a British newspaper to talk in such gushing, sympathetic terms about what it calls a 'militant group' is disgusting.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

Perhaps you should take a leaf from Mr Olmert's book and just give it up as a lost cause?

Just to be clear, I wasn't accusing you of "lying" but I find it rather, shall we say, "curious" that you were not as strong an advocate of diplomacy immediately after the soldiers were kidnapped.

Is it the case that diplomacy in the middle east is only an option in the face of international outrage and an aknowledgement that stated objectives are entirely unattainable by the means proposed?

If you remember your history of this situation, Israel tried diplomacy first and got no where, while Hezbollah continued their usual rocket launches at Israeli civilians.
Now that the international community is about to be brought in, then job of disarming Hezbollah will again rise nearer the top of their agenda, after all, would you want to send your troops into an area where they'll be out numbered by armed terrorists? Think of the trouble that could erupt and the political reprocussions that would bring at home (especially in France).

Perhaps you'll believe I'm feigning the above, or that it is juvenile.
I await your next insult/reply.

[hatedbythemail]

Originally Posted by Chris T

That article in the Grauniad is absolutely unbelievable. Quite aside from what anyone may think about Israel's actions, Hezbollah is a terrorist organisation. For a British newspaper to talk in such gushing, sympathetic terms about what it calls a 'militant group' is disgusting.

personally i dont think its as black and white as that. if israel, as very many believe, is breaching international law then that is "state terrorism." labels are too easy.

btw i posted the guardian article only because i thought it was interesting, not because i was promoting a particular view.

---------- Post added at 12:21 ---------- Previous post was at 12:19 ----------

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/m.../17/dl1702.xml

---------- Post added at 12:26 ---------- Previous post was at 12:21 ----------

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...316383,00.html

---------- Post added at 12:27 ---------- Previous post was at 12:26 ----------

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/...cle1219684.ece

[Chris]

Originally Posted by hatedbythemail

personally i dont think its as black and white as that. if israel, as very many believe, is breaching international law then that is "state terrorism." labels are too easy.

Originally Posted by Chris T

Quite aside from what anyone may think about Israel's actions

I never said anything about Israel. Hezbollah's indiscriminate firing of rockets at civilians in northern Israel is the despicable act of a terrorist gang. This is the case whether or not Israel is also held to be acting as a terrorist state. One is not contingent on the other.

[hatedbythemail]

Originally Posted by Chris T

I never said anything about Israel. Hezbollah's indiscriminate firing of rockets at civilians in northern Israel is the despicable act of a terrorist gang. This is the case whether or not Israel is also held to be acting as a terrorist state. One is not contingent on the other.

true. but then all reporting should not focus on the positives of either side in a conflict? Whatever people's opinion about hezballoh it is clear from reporting that they enjoy popular support in southern lebanon. the israeli govt enjoys significant support within israel. both, it can be claimed, depending on your vantage point, have committed despicable acts.

this is why i think labelling as "terrorist" or whatever can be a distraction as organisations and states can commit abhorrent acts. just because one is a state does not mean it is any more virtuous than one that isn't, nor indeed any less or more representative. lebanese politics look far from straightforward and that is something which needs to be taken into account in the current conflict as indeed does the wider picture in the middle east and support or hostile intervention of other nations, be they neighbours or from the west.

[Chris]

Originally Posted by hatedbythemail

true. but then all reporting should not focus on the positives of either side in a conflict? Whatever people's opinion about hezballoh it is clear from reporting that they enjoy popular support in southern lebanon. the israeli govt enjoys significant support within israel. both, it can be claimed, depending on your vantage point, have committed despicable acts.

this is why i think labelling as "terrorist" or whatever can be a distraction as organisations and states can commit abhorrent acts. just because one is a state does not mean it is any more virtuous than one that isn't, nor indeed any less or more representative. lebanese politics look far from straightforward and that is something which needs to be taken into account in the current conflict as indeed does the wider picture in the middle east and support or hostile intervention of other nations, be they neighbours or from the west.

There is sense in what you say, but the objectivity you display is utterly lacking in the Guardian article, which is without doubt more than a little pro-Hezbollah.

[orangebird]

Originally Posted by hatedbythemail

true. but then all reporting should not focus on the positives of either side in a conflict? <SNIP>

How on earth does any decent human being find any positives WHATSOEVER about this conflict????

[punky]

Originally Posted by Chris T

There is sense in what you say, but the objectivity you display is utterly lacking in the Guardian article, which is without doubt more than a little pro-Hezbollah.

I find that will all media here about this issue, not just the Grauniad. People accuse me of supporting Israel, but they miss the point... I post because I don't think people are looking at Hezbollah like they should. They have already decided they are against Israel and giving Hezbollah a free ride, objectively speaking.

Hence my comment earlier about Hezbollah no longer needing a propaganda arm anymore.

[hatedbythemail]

Originally Posted by Chris T

There is sense in what you say, but the objectivity you display is utterly lacking in the Guardian article, which is without doubt more than a little pro-Hezbollah.

well it was but one article. interesting as always to see different perspectives from other media and commentators. condemnation of hezbollah is far from universal.

---------- Post added at 15:14 ---------- Previous post was at 15:13 ----------

Originally Posted by orangebird

How on earth does any decent human being find any positives WHATSOEVER about this conflict????

hear you! but if id just lost my home and posessions i guess i'd be grateful to hear that funds are being made available for rebuilding.

where those funds are coming from is, of course, interesting in itself.

[Fibonacci poem]

Admin edit (Chris T): Crass, offensive post removed. Don't push your luck. The team is watching you.

[Mr Angry]

OK, I assure you this is intended as a straightforward reply and not an insult.

Originally Posted by Xaccers

If you remember your history of this situation, Israel tried diplomacy first and got no where, while Hezbollah continued their usual rocket launches at Israeli civilians.

Tzipi Livni, the Israeli Foreign Minister, was quoted on Wednesday after her meeting with the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations as saying "The war is not over yet, at first there was the military battle, then there was the diplomatic battle, and now it is crucial that the international community and the Lebanese government will implement fully resolution 1701." This was quoted from and is still available on the DowJones newswires.

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Now that the international community is about to be brought in, then job of disarming Hezbollah will again rise nearer the top of their agenda, after all, would you want to send your troops into an area where they'll be out numbered by armed terrorists?

I'm unsure if you're referring to the proposed international force or the Israeli's when you refer to "their" so I'll move to the second point. You've highlighted the principal logistical reason for the Israeli's failure to achieve their stated objectives in this particular conflict, and their failure to maintain achieved objectives in other conflicts with Lebanon. They underestimated the resistance they were likely to face. They popularized hezbollah through their actions and the damage they inflicted on the civilian population and the countries infrastructure (whether one considers their actions just or not).

Olmert's lack of military and tactical expertize has resulted in the most humiliating defeat (certainly from a military objective point of view) in recent / modern warfare. The most well equipped army in the middle east couldn't defeat what were considered to be a "rag-tag" bunch of troublemakers in the region. It's interesting that the UN draft which Israel has agreed actually refers to hezbollah as "an armed group" and not as a terrorist organization. I think this will add further to the disquiet, disappointment and humiliation that many ordinary Israeli's, not to mention the IDF, are currently feeling and will only pour fuel on the flames of those already calling for the resignation of Olmert and several high ranking military officials. The question is why did the Israeli's send their troops into an area which they were ill equipped to perform in and where the consequences of the actions and ineptiude of their Government colleagues only added to the resistance offered?

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Think of the trouble that could erupt and the political reprocussions that would bring at home (especially in France).

The French are playing a very clever diplomatic game on this matter. The troops they have earmarked for participation have been committed (on the understanding of the French at least) to assist with the recovery of Lebanon, and not as peacekeepers. Indeed their commanding officer has today asked for clarification on their rules of engagement should they be deployed. I spoke with someone this evening who advises that the 13th have been put on "short notice" and anticipate a deployment within four days (diplomatic tussles notwithstanding). The French, as you rightly pointed out, have suffered too many losses for too little gain in that region in recent history for their general population to be comfortable with the idea.