But they're all military targets, I'm sure...

[Mr. Do]

Contrary to popular belief, it isn't the truth, but rather the first person to be in the path of a high-velocity kinetic projectile, be either a jet-powered explosive rocket, a metalic slug 5.56mm or 7.62mm in diameter or shrapnel from any explosive device engineered to kill or harm humans.

Need any more clarifications?

Don't you think that Hezbollah convinced its fighters to attack Israel based upon the lies that Israelies all deserve to die, that Hezbollah terrorists who die in battle will get 72 virgins in heaven, etc etc?

 

[Sh3kel]

Don't you think that Hezbollah convinced its fighters to attack Israel based upon the lies that Israelies all deserve to die, that Hezbollah terrorists who die in battle will get 72 virgins in heaven, etc etc?

I think they're fighting us because they want us all dead be it because we're considered to be sub-human, infidels unworthy of Allah's love and grace, or because we stole some random arab guy's chicken in 1832 - if to them it's subjectly truthful, why the hell should I care why they're shooting at me any more than I should care how I stop them from shooting now?

 

[Gothmog]

The story has the wonderful ring of propaganda, but it does seem impossible simply given the number of rockets landing in Israel daily.

I don't believe that Israel is disorganized, nor that nobody knows what's going on, and especially not that Israel is playing this conflict by ear.

I am quite sure there is a larger picture that is sometimes difficult to see, and that many solders do not comprehend, much less Americans, much less Europeans.

It is always going to be true in conflicts between people this close together and have been fighting for this long, that there will be those who want immediate retribution: violent, mindless, terrible, human. It is only in the actions of the larger systems that we will see thoughtful motives, if we see them at all.

As nivi suggests, I think Syria (and so indirectly Iran) is the secondary target from the Israeli side. The primary one, of course, is stopping the rocket attacks in the medium term.

I also think Democratic Lebanon is the target from the Hezbollah side.

The radicals and the moderates, how do you make the latter take up arms against the former? At what point will that happen?

This is a relevant question wrt Hezbollah in Lebanon, as well as Syria in the Arab League.

I have no idea, and I'm not saying Israel knows how either. But I certainly think that Israel has a plan, which it is acting on. One that is politically viable within the state os Israel, and that they believe has the best chance of success within this context; and yes ... while minimizing total casualties.

 

[shadow2k]

What Israel does is terrorism if not aggression against another state under international law. It's so obvious every objective person will agree to it, but still so many people fail to see it.If USA and their lackeys wouldn't veto every UN resolution and boycott the Geneva conventions we would possibly have a multinational peacekeeping force there to get their damn heads straight.

Is that why the UN passed a resolution telling Israel to disarm, and not Hezbollah? Oh, wait...

By the way, AGAIN, the US vetoed one resolution on July 13th that pertained to this situation. It was a ceasefire with Palestine. The reason they vetoed was that Israel had just been attacked by...guess who? That's right, Hezbollah. The resolution was drafted BEFORE that happened. It was outdated before it even hit the floor for a vote.

And...another thing you seem to have wrong. There's been a peacekeeping force there since 1978. Over 2,000 UN troops. They didn't help in the 80's, didn't help in the 90's, and sure as hell didn't help this time.

 

[Phlegmak]

What I don't get is why are Israelis targetting any cars that travel on some roads. It seems monstrous.

 

[shadow2k]

Are we talking about that area of Beirut where the Hezbollah guy lead the CNN reporter in and had him report that he couldn't see any military stuff anywhere? Yeah, probably pretty hard to see it from the street, don't you think?

CNN pulled the same crap in Iraq. They give up objectivity for access to areas they would not otherwise be let into. Their rep suffered greatly in the past due to this, and this is no different.

That area was controlled by Hezbollah.

Let's not forget that the "kill count" of around 400 "civilians" isn't entirely accurate. Many of the people fighting with Hezbollah or supporting them by letting them hide crap in their houses or fire off rockets from their lawns are considered "civilians". If they aren't specificially part of the military wing, they're considered civilians. You'll never get an accurate count. If you want to pull this nonsense of trying to skew the numbers as much as you can, feel free. Don't expect everyone to take you seriously though.

 

[shadow2k]

What I don't get is why are Israelis targetting any cars that travel on some roads. It seems monstrous.

Not cars. Trucks capable of transporting weapons/supplies to Hezbollah. They also informed everyone they would be doing this. It's the same reason they bombed out the roads/bridges/ports. None of those acts specifically targets civilians...but some were bound to get caught in the crossfire.

No matter how you conduct war, civilians will die. It's simply part of war. Until the people who start these wars are done away with, civilians will die...one way or another. Either by car bombings, rockets lobbed over the border, or retaliatory bombings in return.

Sad, but simply no way around it. Just asking for peace isn't going to do a thing if you don't get rid of the underlying issues that break up the peace in the first place. And sometimes, that requires war.

 

[Sidhe]

Hmm, I forget, what's the first casualty of war again?

According to Sassoon(Vietnam film) The first casualty of war is your hair

I'm wondering what Condi is actually going to do here, has she already decided on a plan of action(or had it decided for her) Or will she work towards a cease fire according to the current situation, she could just let it run 'til it's resolved right? I'm not sure what this war has achieved so far or what a continued conflict will achieve, apart from driving an even bigger wedge between Israel and Arab states.

 

[GinandTonic]

I believe the IDF doesn't give a sh*t about public opinion but it surely is losing the moral argument by quite so blatantly displaying total disdain for any life other than a Jews. Israel could have quite easily retained the higher moral ground in this conflict, if it had carefully targeted Hezbollah.

Indeed. Ian bloody Paisley mentalist northern irish politician and author of the origional anti terrorism tirade (I will never sit down with the men of violence, I will never sit down with those who sit down with the men of violence etc etc) was on the radio chucking a wobby in Parlement today about the Israile overkill. When even he thinks you are going overboard you have pissed off just about everyone.

 

[betazed]

The more I think about this the more it seems to me to be a tragedy of Shakespearean proportions blended with a touch of prisoner’s dilemma. It makes sense for both sides to back down and live in peace with each other. However, if either side backs down unilaterally then that side has the potential to lose heavily in both the short and long run. { Nasrallah – and hence Hezbollah – is not backing down. If he does he has everything to lose. His standing in Lebanon, his leadership and the faith people have in him. If he continues then the worst that can happen to him is that he dies which I am sure – given the general psyche of militants – he is aptly prepared to do. If Israel backs down then, then he hands Nasrallah a victory and makes him – and hence Hezbollah – that much stronger. } So they must continue to fight.

What is worse, influential third parties actually gain in letting the fighting continue and in fact escalate – not the least the parties fighting this war by proxy, i.e. US and Iran.

So I see absolutely zero probability that the fighting will stop soon (Rice’s too little too late mid-east sojourn notwithstanding). But then zero probability events have been known to happen; I am just not holding my breath.

Inevitably, the fight will morph; because nothing ever stays the same. We are living in interesting times. I fear we are cursed into living one for a long time to come.

 

[Mr. Do]

I think they're fighting us because they want us all dead be it because we're considered to be sub-human, infidels unworthy of Allah's love and grace, or because we stole some random arab guy's chicken in 1832 - if to them it's subjectly truthful, why the hell should I care why they're shooting at me any more than I should care how I stop them from shooting now?

I commend your skill in keeping an argument going and getting in the last word

 

[RedWolf]

Not cars. Trucks capable of transporting weapons/supplies to Hezbollah. They also informed everyone they would be doing this. It's the same reason they bombed out the roads/bridges/ports. None of those acts specifically targets civilians...but some were bound to get caught in the crossfire.

No matter how you conduct war, civilians will die. It's simply part of war. Until the people who start these wars are done away with, civilians will die...one way or another. Either by car bombings, rockets lobbed over the border, or retaliatory bombings in return.

Sad, but simply no way around it. Just asking for peace isn't going to do a thing if you don't get rid of the underlying issues that break up the peace in the first place. And sometimes, that requires war.

I've seen reports of cars being rocketed... Even a red cross ambulance. Yes an ambulance COULD contain a rocket but you don't know... so you can't just start blowing away every ambulance that moves. A hospital could contain rockets.. so let's carpet bomb all the hospitals just in case. Any home could contain a rocket so lets turn the entire country into a smoking crater.

Regardless your argument only goes so far - By your logic it is basically morally acceptable to just mow down every living thing in Lebanon and then claim "Ooops too bad so sad.. this stuff happens in war".

The Americans didn't even release this kind of carnage on Afghanistan or Iraq during those two wars... I've done my fair share of criticism of the US military - but their actions were absolutely humane compared to Israel's complete disregard for human life. If this was ANYBODY other then Israel we would all be condemning them.

 

[Sidhe]

I think they're fighting us because they want us all dead be it because we're considered to be sub-human, infidels unworthy of Allah's love and grace, or because we stole some random arab guy's chicken in 1832 - if to them it's subjectly truthful, why the hell should I care why they're shooting at me any more than I should care how I stop them from shooting now?

I believe you have lost perspective, I wouldn't condemn you for it, but it's not the real deal your espousing here. If all Arabs want you dead, then all Israelis want all Arabs dead, I believe neither is the case, not since some Israelis are marching against there government in protest.

If the Arabs could decry there governements they would in many cases, however they are not generally allowed to, so you have an idea that there is no support for peace amongst Arabs, no matter how pattently ernoeous that truly is, especially if you read links by those who have fled opressive regimes.

I think Gothmog has posted a considered response with strands of bias, but still considered as has Betazed, without bias I think, there really is no sense of reality in the west, and it's hard at least for me to condemn or condone any side or make real sense of the issues, because I just don't have any real idea of what is going on, just a media representation. The only good representation of the media is a historical one, when the facts are actually in, and even then there is a biased agenda hidden in their somewhere. Impartiality can be found, and for me it is the considered response, I posted a UN representation a while back, for me it was the only sense I've heard so far, it did suggest that Israel is playing for higher stakes than two soldiers, but it also suggested that now so is Hezbollah, Hizbollah Hezbo-allah, you know whatever you want to spell it as. There are no firm sides to take, if you do then you are in peril of looking deep into the eyes of bias, and dismissing the truth. But then isn't it always the way, if you could get both sides of the story truly you're probably God, and he certain isn't condoning all his children fighting a cyclic war of hatred towards all his children, well I hope not