Go Back   I-Mockery Forum > I-Mockery Discussion Forums > Philosophy, Politics, and News > Israel enters Lebanon
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Thread: Israel enters Lebanon Reply to Thread
Title:
Message
Image Verification
Please enter the six letters or digits that appear in the image opposite.


Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

Topic Review (Newest First)
Aug 28th, 2006 09:16 PM
Abcdxxxx
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinTheOmnivore
abc, what do you think is behind this Nasrallah mea cullpa? Is this just another attempt to promote their underdog, victim image, or is Nasrallah perhaps bowing to pressures from Iran and/or Syria???

"This is what terrorist democracy looks like?"
Misquote maybe? Nasrallah is dealing from pressures from all sides this week in particular. Kofi did't last more then 10 minutes in Hezbollah land, Iran is sending 500 million in aid to Shia villages, Syria are being pressured to negotiate with Israel and they've been cutting power in Southern Lebanon, all the while Lebanon's government can't figure out which way is ass up but they are talking about a treaty with Israel for the first time since 1948 (they too hold an Israeli soldier captive for 20 years and are about to release new video of him), and even some of Nassrallah's own Shia population are speaking out against Hezbollah ....and then his number two guy lost his son on the battlefield.

in either case, there was some interesting speculation at debka:
http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=1201

This editoria challenges the idea that Hezbollah have done what no other Arab army have pulled off against the IDF:
http://www.reason.com/links/links082406.shtml

All that said, Arutz7 (IsraelNN) reported that the IDF wants out of Lebanon quick because Hezbollah have re-armed and they're sitting ducks. In the old days that would have been the reason they would have wanted to stay in there and fight.
Aug 28th, 2006 04:11 PM
Abcdxxxx
Quote:
Originally Posted by Courage the Cowardly Dog
Anyone else think, and this may be me being paranoid but, does anyone else think the money Iran is giving Hezballh may be the same money Hezballah was counterfieting, being returned and laundered through Iran?
There's all sorts of blog world speculation as to the origins and usage of $100 American bills in Lebanon. I don't think anyone has found the conclusive proof like with the Reuturs stuff, but we can all put two and two together.
Aug 28th, 2006 03:09 PM
Courage the Cowardly Dog Remember when during week one of the war they uncovered the American $100 conterfeiting in Hezballah controlled financial district the FBI has been looking for since 2002? Anyone else think, and this may be me being paranoid but, does anyone else think the money Iran is giving Hezballh may be the same money Hezballah was counterfieting, being returned and laundered through Iran? Hezballah was founded by Iranian gaurds in othr countries.

We wonder where they get the money since their banks where blown up in the war but we forget they were caught counterfieting, and where you counterfeit you need to launder as far away as possible.
Aug 28th, 2006 01:17 PM
KevinTheOmnivore abc, what do you think is behind this Nasrallah mea cullpa? Is this just another attempt to promote their underdog, victim image, or is Nasrallah perhaps bowing to pressures from Iran and/or Syria???

"This is what terrorist democracy looks like?"
Aug 28th, 2006 12:56 PM
Courage the Cowardly Dog
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinTheOmnivore
Yeah, they must've gotten all that cash from all those Hezbollah bake sales and car wash fundraisers.

This is the same argument that comes up with Hamas-- Sure they're terrorists and anti-semites, but they do so much in the community! Hell, Even Iran's president ran on a populist platform to improve the struggling Iranian economy. How's that working out? He spends most days blaming all of the Middle East's problems on Israel.
Hitler got the streets paved and reduced crime too. The Nazi party was prior to the war known for social programs. Nazi is after all short for the National Socialist party.

Of course killing all the prisoners and people in asylums or with any health problem sure freed up the money for the other social programs.
Aug 28th, 2006 12:53 PM
Courage the Cowardly Dog Kofi Annan in typical two faced fashion is calling for the release of the soldiers kidnapped and DEMANDING Israel stop the blockade that prevents weapons from getting to the Hezballan troops and breaking the treaty.

I wonder what religion Annan belongs to and what country is he from? This might explain his leanings a bit.
Aug 28th, 2006 01:42 AM
Abcdxxxx Pure comedy, and an admission of guilt!

Quote:
Hezbollah head didn't foresee such a war
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060827/...kxBHNlYwN0bQ--
By ZEINA KARAM, Associated Press Writer Sun Aug 27, 7:18 PM ET
BEIRUT, Lebanon - Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah said in a TV interview aired Sunday that he would not have ordered the capture of two Israeli soldiers if he had known it would lead to such a war.

ADVERTISEMENT

Guerrillas from the Islamic militant group killed three Israeli soldiers and seized two more in a cross-border raid July 12, which sparked 34 days of fighting that ended with a cease-fire on Aug. 14.

"We did not think, even 1 percent, that the capture would lead to a war at this time and of this magnitude. You ask me, if I had known on July 11 ... that the operation would lead to such a war, would I do it? I say no, absolutely not," he said in an interview with Lebanon's New TV station.

He also said Italy and the United Nations had made contacts to help mediate a prisoner swap with Israel, but did not specify whether they had contacted Hezbollah directly. He did not say in what capacity Italy had expressed interest — on its own or on Israel's behalf.

Nasrallah said Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri was in charge of the negotiations and the subject would be discussed during U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan's visit to Beirut on Monday.

There had been "some contacts" to arrange a meeting between him and Annan, he said, but that was unlikely for security reasons.

"The Italians seem to be getting close and are trying to get into the subject. The United Nations is interested," Nasrallah said. "The Israelis have acknowledged that this (issue) is headed for negotiations and a (prisoners) exchange."

A senior Israeli government official declined to comment on such contacts, saying only that Israel "does not negotiate with terrorists" and continues to demand the unconditional release of the two soldiers. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he wasn't authorized to discuss the matter with the media.

Earlier Sunday, Israeli Vice Premier Shimon Peres said no negotiations were being held on a prisoner release.

"Right now no, but I expect that concerning the prisoners in the north, we shall have to wait until the Lebanese government will take charge completely over its land in accordance with the U.N. resolution," he said.

Israeli military officials said earlier this month that Israel is holding 13 Hezbollah prisoners and the bodies of dozens of guerrillas that it could swap for the two captive soldiers, but would not include any Palestinian prisoners in such a deal.

Also Sunday, 245 French soldiers arrived at Beirut's airport to help the Lebanese army rebuild bridges destroyed or damaged by Israeli air strikes.

The troops were separate from a French contribution of 2,000 soldiers to the U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon, known as UNIFIL, which was being expanded to 15,000 members under the U.N. Security Council resolution that ended the Israel-Hezbollah war.

"Our job is to work jointly with the Lebanese army in rebuilding bridges. The French troops will be here for about one and a half months at least," said Lt. Philip Toroller, an officer of the French military mission based at the French Embassy in Beirut. He said the troops would go first to Damour, a coastal town south of Beirut, where they would begin work before moving to other areas in south Lebanon.

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert had received assurances from Annan that new peacekeepers would be on the ground in Lebanon within a week, the prime minister's office said in a statement.

The UNIFIL force is paid for out of the budget of the United Nations, which is made up of member states' annual contributions, and the new expansion of the force will come out of the same budget, said Timur Goksel, a former head of UNIFIL.

American civil rights leader the Rev. Jesse Jackson said he raised the issue of a prisoner swap in talks with President Bashar Assad during a visit, but he did not elaborate on the Syrian leader's response.

Jackson was in Damascus on the first leg of a tour that also included stops in Lebanon and Israel. He said he was there to gauge the "views" of Syrian, Lebanese and Israeli officials, and to appeal to them to stick to the U.N.-brokered cease-fire.

Nasrallah, whose whereabouts are unknown as he went into hiding on the first day of the war, also said he did not believe a second bout of fighting would break out with Israel, even though he said more than half his group's rocket arsenal was still left.

"The current Israeli situation, and the available information tells us that we are not heading to another round," he said.

However, he called any possible attacks on Israeli troops "legitimate" as long as even one Israeli soldier remained in Lebanon.

Lebanese officials have said continuing Israeli overflights violate the 2-week-old cease-fire, and Annan proclaimed an Israeli commando raid one week into the truce a violation. Hezbollah has not retaliated, but Nasrallah said the group would "choose the time and place" to strike back.

"If we have been patient until now, it does not mean we will be patient forever, but we are not obliged to reveal the limits of our patience," he said.

Meanwhile, Malaysia urged the United Nations to let its soldiers join the peacekeeping force despite Israel's opposition to troops from predominantly Muslim nations without diplomatic ties to the Jewish state.

Malaysian troops "will not take sides and will do the job according to the U.N. mandate," Foreign Minister Syed Hamid Albar said, according to the state Bernama news agency.

"Our record (in peacekeeping missions) is good," he said. "But, if the U.N. wants to heed to the wishes of Israel, what can we do?"
Aug 22nd, 2006 11:45 PM
Preechr Off point: The state of humbleness (not humility) is heroism.
Aug 22nd, 2006 10:08 PM
KevinTheOmnivore
Quote:
Originally Posted by derrida
Does it bother everyone who was basically in favor of this that the bombing really didn't do much of anything? All the hand-wringing and all we get is an international peacekeeping force comprised of arab muslims whose home nations probably don't recognize the state of Israel.
1. Israel is objecting to the latter problem.

2. What exactly do you think was Israel's goal? To be attacked? To have two of their soldiers kidnapped?

From the very beginning, Israel asked that Lebanon control their own borders, and disarm Hezbollah. It won't happen, but it's what the UN asked Lebanon to do two years ago, and they're asking them again. Maybe they could, I dunno, do it? It would've spared over 1,000 lives.

Israel's goal is to be secure. If this resolution fails, as it undoubtedly will once Hezbollah rests up and rearms, Israel will continue to defende herself.

Your tone gives the implication that Israel had bigger plans. Would they feel more secure with a more democratic, Hezbollah free Lebanon? Sure, but they were attacked and they defended their country.

"Mossad and Shin Bet weren't even able to penetrate the lower levels of a nationwde popular organization, let alone get an idea of what they were gonna be up against when they came over the border. (hint: tunnels and RPG 29s)"

Um, and? Israel has never argued that Hezbollah is some underdog insurgency. That's a myth promoted by the Arab world, but the Israelis have always known better.

Is it a surprise that a well funded, well trained, and well armed paramilitary unit managed to stay alive and put up a fight?

I'm not exactly sure what your point is with your score card. Israel could've carpet bombed all of Lebanon, rather than using targeted bombings and infrastructure targets. That probably would've done away with Hezbollah, but it also would've killed a lot more people. Maybe Israel didn't "score" so high in your book, but that's what happens when one side plays by the rules and the other does not.
Aug 22nd, 2006 09:51 PM
Abcdxxxx It's way too early to "tally the scores".

I wouldn't cry for Halutz of Olmert or any of them. If the IDF took a defeat, it was really at the hands of it's own administration.

I would agree, there really was no reason for them to underestimated how intertwined Iran would be in a offensive attack by Hezbollah. Iran's capabilities should be considered Hezbollah's capabilities. Many Israelis are naive, and do not realize that while they've spent 15 years learning peace songs, the Arabs have been breeding animals for the sole purpose of wiping Israel off the map. To that end, neither side achieved their goals - it was a squirmish. The benefit to Israel is knowing who they're fighting against, and weakening Iran's second line in any possible attack on Israel. If we play the numbers game (not the best way to judge these battles though) 500 Hezbollah casualties is a huge hit considering estimates of an army of 1000, and possibly 10,000 reservists. Israel's 150 casualties, out of a force between 10,000-30,000 were largely due to their own self defeating strategy, putting their lives in danger to avoid casualties - or just outright idiotic positioning. Israel's initial reserve numbers in the 300,000 range but if shit hits the fan, you'll see more then half the country suit up, and every veteran from Dr. Ruth on down, hopping on a plane, and grabbing their walkers and their uzis. Anyway, in that regard, Israel did okay. In reality, I don't think anyone feels they lost 150 men in exchange for accomplishing anything aside from maybe Lebanon putting it's army in the South again.

Of course, if a small percentage of the entire Arab world just up and decides to rush the borders, Israel is dog meat. Like I've been saying, this has always been Israel vs. the Arab/Islamic world.
Aug 22nd, 2006 09:51 PM
Preechr That's what happens when any possible rational perspective is obscured by naive notions of civilian casualties, torture and other non-issues. We are drunk on our own free lifestyle, blind to realities in other civilizations. Everything is a human interest story these days, and no one is to be blamed for anything that happens to them. The bigger guy is always guilty in any confrontation, be it Wal-mart or Israel, Exxon or the US. No one asks the Katrina victims or the Lebanon evacuees why the fuck they stuck around until far too late with no back up plan... We all just want to know about the hardships they endured at the hands of the bigger guy.

Iraqi citizens are, just like everyone else in the news, victims. Whenever you see a victim, you look for their victimizer. That person or entity is, by default, the bigger guy. There is no opportunity for everyday Iraqis to be seen in a hopeful light, because they are in the news, and thus victims. The only bigger guy in this equation is us.
Aug 22nd, 2006 01:55 PM
kahljorn Well.. ok.. counter-insurgency warfare? That seems the wrong term for a war that was fought over a border with missile strikes etc. I didn't think there was much actual fighting. I don't see how doing five to one is bad at all Please explain.

If hezbollah was fighting with soldiers, would they use guerilla tactics(it seems like they used some guerilla tactics even with their missile strikes)? Just curious because doing five to one against gurillas is pretty good. Considering guerillas are typically small units designed to fight against larger units based on the premise that they should kill more bad guys than take casualties. In that line of thought their forces failed.

Outside of that this war was ghey. More lives lost for no good reason.

how is the war in iraq going bad? In the past occupations of cities would often be contested for years, and the "insurgency" may go on for years as well. Do you think that 3,000 years ago when an army would occupy a territory everybody who was living/fighting there would just shrug their shoulders and walk away?
I've always been interested in why people think the war in iraq is going bad.
Aug 22nd, 2006 01:16 PM
derrida So, can we tally up the score now?

Does it bother everyone who was basically in favor of this that the bombing really didn't do much of anything? All the hand-wringing and all we get is an international peacekeeping force comprised of arab muslims whose home nations probably don't recognize the state of Israel.

The IDF is saying they only killed about 500 Hezzbollah fighters in addition to however many civilian sympathizers/human shields/total dumbasses. (which are possibly going to cost Dan Halutz his job) The IDF is also reporting 118 casualties. Five to one isn't great for counter-insurgency warfare. We're at ten to one in Iraq and we all see how well that's going. Furthermore, Mossad and Shin Bet weren't even able to penetrate the lower levels of a nationwde popular organization, let alone get an idea of what they were gonna be up against when they came over the border. (hint: tunnels and RPG 29s)
Aug 21st, 2006 01:00 PM
kahljorn It's funny because I was actually thinking of the german social programs when I made that post. :O
Aug 21st, 2006 01:07 AM
Abcdxxxx They studied how social programs were used in Germany, that's all. it should be pretty transparent by now. It's supposed to shame the international community who will no doubt still be sending aid without even a trace of accountability for the funds. This isn't meant to be aid so much as a reward for sustaining a loss. They're on salary, just another element of the propaganda machine. Like a bonus for storming the UN offices, and creating the illusion of an impromptu Nasrallah rally in the middle an Israeli bombing campaign that's supposed to be so devastating they can't evacuating to safety isn't an option.

Not to mention the US dollars are probably counterfit. Can you buy a Coke-a-cola with Dhimmi dollars in Hezbollistan?
Aug 20th, 2006 11:59 PM
kahljorn Yea it's just like gang members.

Anyway, terrible horrible dictatorish non-providing rulers are pretty rare these days. in any political institution you have to "Give to the people" or do other things to make the people like you or at least keep them from revolting. Naturally there's a diplomatic foothold in helping people around you, it's almost as good as bribing someone This idea has been understood for a long time by rulers and pretty much anyone with a brain who realizes that there's breaking points. Not that I'm saying they necessarily don't love their community or people, but thinking politicians are selfless when they give is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

Regardless of if you're providing for your people or not, though, that doesn't mean how you treat other people is nice or correct, or that you should be allowed ot commit evil because you do one or two nice things. HEY YOU BRUTALLY KILLED THIS GUY BUT I SAW YOU HELP THAT OLD LADY CROSS THE STREET SO YOURE FREE TO GO.
Aug 20th, 2006 11:27 PM
KevinTheOmnivore Yeah, they must've gotten all that cash from all those Hezbollah bake sales and car wash fundraisers.

This is the same argument that comes up with Hamas-- Sure they're terrorists and anti-semites, but they do so much in the community! Hell, Even Iran's president ran on a populist platform to improve the struggling Iranian economy. How's that working out? He spends most days blaming all of the Middle East's problems on Israel.
Aug 20th, 2006 10:56 PM
kahljorn I read that Hezbollah was helping to rebuild Lebanon by giving money to people who's homes had been destroyed. 12,000 US dollars worth.
Aug 20th, 2006 03:00 PM
KevinTheOmnivore uh, that's ok.

This is swell:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...NGK9KLVH41.DTL

Quote:
Hezbollah night-vision gear was from Britain, Israel says
It's believed to be an export to Iran in drug-fighting effort

- Matthew Kalman, Chronicle Foreign Service
Sunday, August 20, 2006

(08-20) 04:00 PDT Kiryat Shemona, Israel -- Israeli intelligence officials have complained to Britain and the United States that sensitive night-vision equipment recovered from Hezbollah fighters during the war in Lebanon had been exported by Britain to Iran. British officials said the equipment had been intended for use in a U.N. anti-narcotics campaign.

Israeli officials say they believe the state-of-the-art equipment, found in Hezbollah command-and-control headquarters in southern Lebanon during the just-concluded war, was part of a British government-approved shipment of 250 pieces of night-vision equipment sent to Iran in 2003.

Israeli military intelligence confirmed that one of the pieces of equipment is a Thermo-vision 1000 LR tactical night-vision system, serial No. 155010, part No. 193960, manufactured by Agema, a high-tech equipment company with branches in Bedfordshire, England, and San Diego. A spokesman for Agema in San Diego denied all knowledge of the system.

The equipment, which needed special export-license approval from the British government, was passed to the Iranians through a program run and administered by the U.N. Drug Control Program. The equipment uses infrared imaging to provide nighttime surveillance that allows the user to detect people and vehicles moving in the dark at a range of several miles.
I just don't understand why the UN insists on being a rubber stamp for terrorists. Certainly the British and italians are at fault here as well, but how does the UN "sponsor" this program? Is there any monitoring, or inventory done on equipment shipped to friggin Iran?
Aug 20th, 2006 10:04 AM
Courage the Cowardly Dog
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinTheOmnivore
Good stuff, do you have a link for that EU info?
curses, i misrepresented. I was reading an article about the EU investigation and this article and got them mixed up.

http://ussneverdock.blogspot.com/200...errorists.html

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sto...005961,00.html

I withdraw my statement, I'm not Reuters. This number came from Israel so it is be biased.

I am very embarrassed about this, i haven't posted at news websites in years and i forgot to always post a link and double check all sources. I read this at work int he morning and posted later at home and got mixed up.

I'm very sorry, it won't happen again.
Aug 19th, 2006 11:22 AM
Preechr I had a guy try to explain it to me once by pulling a bunch of cans and bottles out my cabinets and fridge, showing me all the "secret" symbols on most of them that prove Jews run the world.
Aug 19th, 2006 11:20 AM
Preechr Nono... you explained it pretty well. I'm sure a lot of people better understand why they should hate you now.

...and knowledge is power!
Aug 19th, 2006 04:11 AM
Abcdxxxx Historically, I think it stems from those who were threatened by dual nationalism, and an adherance to a code of law beyond whatever the ruling powers dictated. Being the oldest, or first brings the type of animosity you don't hear much of from say, the Kurds, or Druze. Christian and Islamic scriptures have some issues built into their text by nature of adopting the Torah attempting to be a continuation.

The rest comes from inferiority complexes and a jealousy for what Jews have accomplished. I lot of people don't like to hear that a minority group which makes up 0.25% of the world population, or less then 2.0% of the US population has been so accomplished and influential. That pisses people off. I'm sure people reading that right now are irked and want me to shut the fuck up just for mentioning it.

The thing about asking why is, it doesn't really matter why. Asking why makes it sound like there's a reason. Really irrational bigotry doesn't have any reasoning.
Aug 18th, 2006 10:42 PM
kahljorn I think someone asked this earlier but:

WHY DO PEOpLE HATE JEWS?

Is it that time old fear of them moving to our country stealing all of our jobs and taking over our country or something stemming from that? Is it just because they killed Jesus?

PS how did this whole ISRAEL IS THE BAD GUY IN THE LEBANON WAR deal come about? Was that a media pathology?
Aug 18th, 2006 10:22 PM
Abcdxxxx The peacekeepers were set to arrive Sunday - There are already reports of missile deliveries getting bombed by the IAF while crossing the Lebanese - Syrian border, tonight. What a sham.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Courage the Cowardly Dog

Israel is pissed at the UN. They have made the demand that of the peacekeeping troops being sent NONE of them should be allowed to come from countries who do not recognize Israel's right to exist and wish them destroyed. TAKE THAT MALAYSIA!
2/3's of the UN's entire activety since it's formation has been regarding Israel. I don't know what else they expected.

Maylasia was the location the Iranian president made his declaration that "The world would be in the hands of Islam over the next few years", and Malaysia is also the nation with a former PM who declared Jews control the world. You have to be a Muslim to become a Malaysian national, disqualifying the Kafirs, Seihks, and Hindu's. They sound like the PERFECT choice to keep peace against the Zioist entity.

Thank heavens we have the UN to advance this regional conflict into a World , and thank goodness the resolution to send 17,000 peacekeepers to Darfur is expected to be rejected. We wouldn't want to distract the world from the reals problem of our time: Zionist!
This thread has more than 25 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

   


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:59 PM.


© 2008 I-Mockery.com
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.