Hezbollah: take that

[zenith-nadir]

...and want to share their holiness with their neighbors by hiding among women and children when allah calls them home.

That is a fact that I feel doesn't get enough "airplay". The whole "collective punishment" argument is based upon the fact that Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, use civilian areas for cover and concealment. Anyone can look at the news and see that the IDF is bombing "Beirut suburbs". The reason they are bombing "suburbs" is that is where Hezbollah hides and is headquartered.

Unfortunately the electricity for Hezbollah's "bases of operation" is on the same grid as the non-combatants power systems. The roads and bridges Hezbollah uses to transport arms and militants are the same roads and bridges the non-combatant Lebanese use. Now scream "collective punishment!"...see how that works?

Once again the Lebanese Government - like the Palestinian Authority and Hamas, Islamic Jihad, etc - allows Hezbollah - ( a terrorist organization ) - to operate with impunity and use any infrastructure or neighborhood/town/village they desire in their tiresome jihad against "the zionists".

{edited to add}

p.s. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad invokes Godwin's Law!

"The Zionists think that they are victims of Hitler, but they act like Hitler and behave worse than Genghis Khan,"

Jul. 16, 2006 12:04

 

[AmateurScientist]

...Aaaaaaaaaaaand another missed point. Ah well. Seems be a bad case of hyperliteralism going around these days.

Yeah, I saw that too. I don't get Geni's blind spot here. Darat suffered a stroke of that literalism on this topic yesterday too.

You seem very comrfortable with overgeneralizations today, but hey, let's go with it. Let's look at an "overgeneralized" summary of the comabatants:

1. Israelis who don't want to die.
2. Hezbollah members who do want to die.

Seems like there's one solution to both goals, and it's taking place as we speak. So I guess I have to ask, what's your problem with it? Civilian losses? Maybe you should amend your description to read, They have the whole martdom[sic] thing down perfectly and want to share their holiness with their neighbors by hiding among women and children when allah calls them home.

Excellent point. Again, Geni, you cannot have it both ways. If you believe the Shia have incorporated dying for their "cause" (which is actually the extermination of Jews the world over, the establishment of an Islamic uberstate in the Middle East, the destruction of all of Western civilization, and finally, dominion over the entire planet -- Allah demands it), then you cannot complain when they die for their cause. They are getting what they want, no? To them, dying for their cause is the highest possible achievement a faithful Muslim can make. Pretty damn twisted, huh? How you believe such a mindset can co-exist with the Western world is beyond me.

Also, from a military perspective, when your enemy uses residential neighborhoods for its bases of operation, then that's where you take the battle. It should hardly be shocking that that is where Israeli fighter/bombers are bombing. Israel has warned people in those areas to get out. They can leave, or face possible harm. These are the people who support Hezbollah, so they are the enemy as well. They are not "innocent."

AS

 

[AmateurScientist]

That is a fact that I feel doesn't get enough "airplay". The whole "collective punishment" argument is based upon the fact that Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, use civilian areas for cover and concealment. Anyone can look at the news and see that the IDF is bombing "Beirut suburbs". The reason they are bombing "suburbs" is that is where Hezbollah hides and is headquartered.

Agreed that that does not get enough airplay.

Unfortunately the electricity for Hezbollah's "bases of operation" is on the same grid as the non-combatants power systems. The roads and bridges Hezbollah uses to transport arms and militants are the same roads and bridges the non-combatant Lebanese use. Now scream "collective punishment!"...see how that works?

I'm not so sure it's unfortunate. Blockading and cutting off supply lines of your enemy is an age-old military technique. It is siege warfare. The entire point of it is to weaken your enemy's resolve and ability to fight. That necessarily, and also by design, includes all civilians. The civilians going without power and food means that the combatants will face pressure from their own civilians to disarm and surrender. If they do not, then the combatants under siege will be responsible for everyone's dying together. That's the theory, anyway. The reality in this situation, is that Lebanon's neighbors might be able to come to its aid somehow.

Time will tell.

p.s. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad invokes Godwin's Law!

Incredible. I dropped my drink when I heard that last night.

AS

 

[Skeptic]

These are the people who support Hezbollah, so they are the enemy as well. They are not "innocent."

Well, I'm certainly not sure everybody in those neighborhoods supports Hizbullah. However, that's not of great relevance.

I mean, if your neighbor is a homocidal maniac who shoots people randomly across the street, then you can certainly expect the police to use reasonable means to try and minimize the harm that is caused to you, but the homocidal maniac can hardly expect immunity simply due to the fact that you're next door and might get hurt.

In any case, the moral responsibility for your death in a police raid to take him out would be his, not the police's.

 

[Skeptic]

The Zionists think that they are victims of Hitler, but they act like Hitler

Well, now Ahmanijad got me totally confused. He asserts at the same time that:

1). Hitler did nothing wrong: the holocaust is a vicious zionist lie invented for colonialist purposes.

2). The zionists are acting like Hitler.

3). He himself is going to copy the Hitler did by killing all the zionists any day now.

Well, that makes sense...

 

[Polaris]

I'm way out of my depth here,as I know sod all about Middle Eastern history;but Im curious to know what the U.S- or Iran maybe-would do should Israel use a nuclear weapon! They have renowned itchy trigger fingers(first Gulf War)and seem barmy enough to do it.
I for one pray they don't.Maybe Hezbollah could quietly give the soldiers back and tiptoe away ..

Israel didn't engage in hostilities in the first Gulf War - even when they had SCUD missiles falling on their territory from Iraq.

Iran wasn't involved in the first Gulf War, except when Saddam flew some of his MiGs there so they wouldn't be blown up (as far as I know, he never got them back either).

Israel won't use a nuclear weapon unless its very existence is genuinely threatened - such as if Ahmadinejad or Assad, or for that matter, bin Laden or a jihadi junta in Pakistan, got a nuke and threatened to zap Israel.

Hezbollah is after the total destruction of Israel - a second Holocaust. They'll only return those soldiers in pieces.

 

[Azrael 5]

Israel didn't engage in hostilities in the first Gulf War - even when they had SCUD missiles falling on their territory from Iraq.

As America warned them against it.
Just why were the soldiers kidnapped in the first place anyway? It all seems the military equivalent of my Dad's bigger than your Dad!

 

[Skeptic]

Just why were the soldiers kidnapped in the first place anyway? It all seems the military equivalent of my Dad's bigger than your Dad!

Welcome to the middle east. It's a religious conflict--"my imaginary friend can beat up your imaginary friend"--fought by means of kidnapping and terror--"my dad's bigger than your dad".

Think "five-year-old-mentality with heavy artillery" and you've got the solution for why things are as they are.

 

[Rob Lister]

Welcome to the middle east. It's a religious conflict--"my imaginary friend can beat up your imaginary friend"--fought by means of kidnapping and terror--"my dad's bigger than your dad".

Think "five-year-old-mentality with heavy artillery" and you've got the solution for why things are as they are.

I whole-heartedly disagree, at least as it applies to Israel. They have remained steadfastly, amazingly tolerant and restrained far beyond reason. The Islamofacists may (clearly do) think that way, but the way you put it, it applies to both sides equally. That clearly is not the case. Israel may (finally) see a god-given right to defend themselves regardless of public opinion to the contrary, but do not appear, on any level, to exibit a god-given right/duty to exterminate all other religions in the area first, and then the world...including other factions of their own religion.

How anyone (not talking about you) can side in any way with the islamofacists in this conflict is incomprehisably beyond me. It's like electing the KKK as world leader.

 

[geni]

And often they don't. Since even you concede that border disputes don't always have to wind up in armed conflict, that effectively demolished your argument that Hezbollah is under the impression that Israel hasn't withdrawn.

By your own admission, you cocede that they choose to kill.

where did I argue other wise?

Just as Israel has chosen to kill in repsonse.

Yes choseing to kill in responce is popular option.

Is that what you think should happen? If not, how on earth is this relevant?

You were trying to use use standard responcies to situations to justify Israels actions.

You seem very comrfortable with overgeneralizations today, but hey, let's go with it. Let's look at an "overgeneralized" summary of the comabatants:

1. Israelis who don't want to die.
2. Hezbollah members who do want to die.

Oh dear. You appear to be forgetting that Hezbollah are not the only people in lebanon. Neither are the shia although they would of course like that to be the case.

 

[Skeptic]

I whole-heartedly disagree, at least as it applies to Israel.

I wasn't completely serious. It's just that I couldn't resist a bitter joke in one of my bitter moods.

 

[Skeptic]

You were trying to use use standard responcies to situations to justify Israels actions.

I'd say israeli actions--in reply to kidnappings, killings, bombings, and threats of annihiation--ARE justified, wouldn't you?

Oh dear. You appear to be forgetting that Hezbollah are not the only people in lebanon.

So what? In virtually NO war whatever are the warmongers all, or most of the population. Not all Germans were Nazis and not all Japanese were supporters of Tojo. Yet it was indeed morally justified to fight--and bomb--Japan and Germany.

You keep bringing up total irrelevancies as if they make a difference.

 

[a_unique_person]

And are you claiming the airstrike targeted the civilian minibus... or that its targets were infratructure, in this case, a main road?

Incidentally, the part you deliberately didn't quote (apart, of course, from all the rest of the article which gives a list of the Hizbullah attacks on israel--of course, that is deliberate attack on civilians, but, hey, who cares? It's only jews...):



Ah, good ol' UN, brave and efficient as usual.



So? Since when is that a problem as far as you're concerned?

Despite your repeated slanders, lies, deceit and abuse, I have always been in favour of a two state, peaceful solution. I don't like the way this is going, and it is killing a lot of innocent people, on both sides. Just because I think Israel should act correctly in the case of the Palestinians, it doesn't mean I want Israelis to die like that.

 

[a_unique_person]

Today Israeli fighter jets struck at least two border crossing points from Lebanon into Syria. Israel is in fact trying to cut off Hezbollah's supply lines, just as I said earlier in this thread. That is an age-old and effective military strategy.

Civilians will most certainly suffer, not just from direct attacks, but from the effective siege of their country. The whole point of siege warfare is to destroy your enemy's will and ability to fight by choking it. When done right, it works. Check your history books.

Which civilians? AFAIK, most of the Lebanese civilians have nothing to do with Hezbollah. They already don't have 'the will to fight'. As a tactic, it usually fails anyway. Just as much history of that happening, too.

 

[Rob Lister]

Which civilians? AFAIK, most of the Lebanese civilians have nothing to do with Hezbollah.

That, in itself, may be the problem. Leaving them to do as they wish is decidedly, finally, somewhat contraindicated. Hopefully the 'civilians', along with their elected leaders, will soon gather a clue or two as to just what happens when you continiously allow a missle-armed group to freely and openly operate within your soverign state borders against another soverign state that is far, far more powerful and finally waking from a too-too long slumber.

I'm of the opinion that Israel should strike Iran as well. Why not? Is the U.N. going to condemn them twice? Scary. Is the U.S. going to abandon them? Not too damn likely. Not even if Dean, Gore or Kerry were running the show. They have a short-term free hand...they should make the best use of it possible.

They'll show restraint...restraint not deserved and probably counterproductive...but hopefully they'll send at least a 10 or 20 year message before doing so.

 

[a_unique_person]

So we can agree this is not just 'surgical strikes'. It's a war, and civilians die in wars.

 

[AmateurScientist]

So we can agree this is not just 'surgical strikes'. It's a war, and civilians die in wars.

Call it whatever suits you.

Yes, civilians have died and more will die. It's an unfortunate fact of life. So is armed conflict. The two sort of go hand-in-hand, in case you hadn't noticed.

AS

 

[geni]

I'd say israeli actions--in reply to kidnappings, killings, bombings, and threats of annihiation--ARE justified, wouldn't you?

Some are. Some may not be.

So what? In virtually NO war whatever are the warmongers all, or most of the population. Not all Germans were Nazis and not all Japanese were supporters of Tojo. Yet it was indeed morally justified to fight--and bomb--Japan and Germany.

In both the countries the level of support was very significant. We were dealing the armed forces of those countries. The armed forces of lebanon are a joke. You know they are not the problem

You keep bringing up total irrelevancies as if they make a difference.

The Maronites make up about 20% of the population. Throw in the other cristian groups (they were generaly allied) and you reach ~35%. Interesting defintion of total irrelevancies you've got going there. There are also the Druze who make up about 5% but they praticaly make Israel look like Mr popular (world wide they do. No one seems to like the Druze).

 

[Azure]

Which civilians? AFAIK, most of the Lebanese civilians have nothing to do with Hezbollah. They already don't have 'the will to fight'. As a tactic, it usually fails anyway. Just as much history of that happening, too.

So what should Israel do? Quit with their mission to take out Hebollah since they're hiding behind civilian targets?

 

[a_unique_person]

That's always been the problem, hasn't it. Israel has painted itself into a corner.

IN LEBANON, as in Gaza, it is not Israel's right to protect its civilian population from terrorist aggression that is at issue. It is the way Israel goes about exercising that right.

Despite bitter lessons from the past, Israel's political and military leaders remain addicted to the notion that, whatever they have a right to do, they have a right to overdo, to the point where they lose what international support they had when they began their retaliatory measures.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/israel-must-beware-the-cost/2006/07/16/1152988409591.html