Israel invades Gaza Strip?!

[FinnAgain]

@GIGObuster

Since the latest I remember from Lebanon was most of the government asking Syria to get out, I really do wonder were you get this “fair” game idea.

Non sequitor. First of all, Syria ≠ Hezbollah. An opposition to the former does not automatically translate into an opposition to the later. Moreoever, even if true, it doesn’t invalidate a ‘fair game’ sense that one can respond to the military actons of a sovereign nation.

If, for example, America launched a war which was hugely unpopular, those we attacked wouldn’t be forced to target only Republican politicians.

@GIGObuster

And you are working towards making a fence sitter like me lose respect.

By pointing out that literally for decades almost any attacks on Israel had a sizeable percentage of the world community not caring? Ah well, takes all sorts of respect I suppose.

@GIGObuster

You may not care, but I still care when government (or is it the media in Israel?) is not telling me the whole truth when war is happening.

What whole truth? What do you feel you haven’t been told?

@GIGObuster

They call the strikes surgical, collateral dammage still shows.

Yes… so?

@GIGObuster

I thought we were talking about Lebanon now.

Is there any reason to think that the state sponsored, funded, equipped, housed, and supported terrorist organization that’s based in one country would get a different reaction from that based in another country?

I mean, honestly… do you think that for anti-Israel folks the facts matter, at all? You saw RTF in this very thread, having not done any reading of a newspaper for literally -weeks-, but still attempting to dictate Israel’s foreign policy. Do you really think that most of the world’s reaction would’ve been all that much different to Lebanon a handfull of days after they ignored Syria?

@GIGObuster

Never assign to malice what incompetence can explain.

And never assign to incompetence what is obviously a willful and directed action. Come on, play fair. Do you think that the Lebanese government signed over money, gave them weapons, and has publically supported them… by accident?

@GIGObuster

I was going to say Yes. Until I checked the current targets.

They are pressuring the government which controls Hezbollah. Seems an effective way to go about things.

You’ve also misread the information. Just because they don’t police their southern areas that well, doesn’t mean that all the terrorists are in the south. Nor does it absolve the Lebanese government from the crime of funneling money and weapons to them. That, certainly, is well under their control.

Or, again, if the US military attacked another country, could we demand that only those senators who authorized/knew of the attack could have their state’s bombed? That the rest of the government/military was right off limits?

[Ryan_Liam]

What I don’t understand is why the UN hasn’t taken over responsibility over the Sheeba Farms, they’re Syrian territory right? And if they took over, it would undoubtebly allow Israel to withdraw with a buffer against Hezbollah in Lebanon, and also destroy their claims that Israel was still continuing to be the ‘imperialist aggressor add slogan here’ Which would help the Lebanese Government and international community to pressure the militia to disarm.

But what I’m not surprised at is the reaction, people are immediately declaring that the response to this crisis by Israel is ‘overreacting’ Well if it is, then blame the Lebanese government for not doing enough to secure it’s borders, and essentially allowing a terrorist organisation to dictate it’s foreign policy south of the border.

And also, I think this was essentially the last straw for the Israelis, they know that they’ll never have peace as long as Hezbollah is essentially allowed it’s own fiefdom in the Bekka valley/south Lebanon,so hence why it’s attacking Lebanon proper and not just the southern area. They’re trying to force Beirut to tackle this problem once and for all. So yeah, even though Finn isn’t fond of my viewpoints, consider me agreeing with you

[GIGObuster]

@Alessan

Here’s an analogy: say that the McDonalds Corporation gave one of its trucks to a known alcholic and drug abuser, with no licence and a history of multiple vehicular homicides, whi then went out and ran over a kindergarten class. Would the MacDonad Corp be open to civil and criminal charges? Even though they did not plan on killing anyone?

I don’t need an analogy, Israel has been caught several times spying on the USA. Yet, I don’t think for a second then to assign deceit or backstabbing ideals to all of the people of Israel, I still see only a divided government that thought the civil part of Hezbollah could be controlled better by being part of the government, It failed, assuming now they all deserve destruction is still wrong, particularly when I do think we are doing the job for Hezbollah in Lebanon:

I do think that while Hezbollah is an important force in the Lebanon Parliament, the fact they were at odds with the majority of parliament tells me that Hezballah is happier now that Israel is doing the job for them of destroying the government in Lebanon.

http://www.cfr.org/publication/10159/

Today, Hezbollah holds twenty-three seats in the Lebanese parliament. The group is engaged in talks with other political parties inside Lebanon. However, Hezbollah is under increasing pressure from other parties in Lebanon to disarm and renounced violence.

http://www.cfr.org/publication/10673/lebanons_power_politics.html

Experts say discontent has festered over Lebanon’s corrupt and inefficient power structure, which the Cedar Revolution reshuffling didn’t effectively resolve. Karim Makdisi, a professor at the American University of Beirut, says in an interview with cfr.org’s Esther Pan that “there’s no system for resolving disputes in this country.” Lebanon’s government works under a “confessional” system, set up in 1943 by withdrawing French authorities, in which power is divided among religious groups, supposedly based on population proportion. But Lebanon hasn’t conducted a census since 1932, and according to a 2005 EU report (PDF), the system is in need of urgent reform. In accordance with the 1989 Taif Accords, seats in Lebanon’s parliament are divided evenly between Christians and Muslims. There is no official data, but experts say Muslims now represent at least 60 percent of Lebanon’s population.

Syria’s role remains unclear. In February 2005 there was political upheaval in Beirut when Syrian officials were implicated in the assassination of the Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, and Syrian troops were forced to withdraw from the country, where they had been stationed since 1976. Syria has accused Lebanese parliamentarians of working with U.S. officials (LAT) to undermine Syria’s government, though Lebanon’s foreign minister dismissed these allegations (Daily Star). Now accusations are flying the other way, with Lebanese nationalists saying Syria is inciting protests to weaken parliament’s mandate and keep Lahoud in power.

The picture I get? A weak government that has a growing extremist muslim population, that I see getting stronger by Israel’s attack.

[TheFonz]

You would think Israel would be much kinder and much more diplomatic seeing as so many people are paranoid about end-time prophecy and all that good stuff. So why are they being so aggressive, and such assholes? They WANT to piss off the Muslims and they WANT to fulfill the prophecy; that’s why.

[FinnAgain]

Must not pick scab… must not pick… oh, hell.

@TheFonz

So why are they being so aggressive, and such assholes?

We’ve already dealt with how some people want to claim self defense is really aggression. It caused the OP of this thread to say that if I remember his words, I should be ashamed.

Aggression has an actual definition that’s actually in use. Target has an actual definition that’s actually in use. Making up definitions for words may be fun, but this Humpty Dumpty language game is stale in a debate. Do you truly want to go down this path as well?

@TheFonz

They WANT to piss off the Muslims and they WANT to fulfill the prophecy; that’s why.

Of course! Why didn’t I see it before? Israeli Jews are, in reality, Apocalyptic Christians. It’s all coming together now.

@GIGObuster

I don’t need an analogy, Israel has been caught several times spying on the USA. Yet, I don’t think for a second then to assign deceit or backstabbing ideals to all of the people of Israel,

You don’t have to. Spying, for instance, would’ve been a valid reason for the US to cut off aid. If we’d done so, the ramifications would affect all of Israel, even though only a few members of the government most likely knew, let alone gave the thumbs up to such a program.

Likewise, if the elements of the United States military/government used, say, Black Water Security, to attack a country… their retaliation could, validly, target the United States and not just those congresscritters.

@GIGObuster

I still see only a divided government that thought the civil part of Hezbollah could be controlled better by being part of the government,

Come on. Are you honestly going to contend that they were giving money and weapons to Hezbollah in the thought that it’d make them less likely to incite violence?

@GIGObuster

I do think that while Hezbollah is an important force in the Lebanon Parliament, the fact they were at odds with the majority of parliament tells me that Hezballah is happier now that Israel is doing the job for them of destroying the government in Lebanon.

Can you please point to a date at which the Lebanese government froze Hezbollah’s funding? Cut off their weapon sales? Attempted to remove them from their territory?

In other words, can you name a single action which would reduce their complicitity in sponsoring a terrorist entity? If there’s an item in the Lebanese budget year after year marked “Weapons for Hezbollah”, don’t you think they bear some responsibility for what happens?

The ME has a long history of saying one thing for public consumption, and another to rally the troops at home. Has Lebanon shown actions which support or oppose Hezbollah?

We can discuss their rhetoric later if necessary. But if we do, it should be interesting that Lebanon’s foreign minister referred to Hezbollah and their prisoners as ‘ours’ and referred to Hezbollah’s captivity of them as something “we” did.

@GIGObuster

The picture I get? A weak government that has a growing extremist muslim population, that I see getting stronger by Israel’s attack.

And yet, you said earlier that if Lebanon denied knowledge, complicity, and control much as Syria did, then you’d support not just Israel retaliating, but the US declaring war as well. And here the government (who funds and equips Hezbollah), is denying knowledge, complicity, and control…

[FinnAgain]

I mean, honestly, even as recently as January 31, 2006, we had the Lebanese Defense Ministry ordering his soldiers to allow a convoy filled with weapons to proceed on to Hezbollah. Now they want to throw up their hands and say “Who? Those Hezbollah folks? Never knew 'em. No idea how they got armed. Big mystery. Totally not our fault.”

Heck, even their rhetoric doesn’t match up.

The UN has called on Lebanon several times to deploy regular forces in the south and along the border with Israel.

But President Lahoud said he does not support such a move “as long as we are in war with Israel”.

President Lahoud was also quoted in Lebanese National News Agency as saying that “Resistance is the only way to overcome Israel”.

So they’re at war with Israel by their own statements, and Hezbollah serves as part of the armed “resistance” and they refuse to crack down on Hezbollah as long as they’re part of the ‘resistance’ fighting their war, and they give Hezbollah weapons, and support, and money, and safe haven… but no, they’re not at all responsible for what Hezbollah does.

Etc, etc, etc…

[GIGObuster]

@FinnAgain

And yet, you said earlier that if Lebanon denied knowledge, complicity, and control much as Syria did, then you’d support not just Israel retaliating, but the US declaring war as well. And here the government (who funds and equips Hezbollah), is denying knowledge, complicity, and control…

That is because then evidence would be expected to be produced, I’m looking around and the names mentioned mostly on the funding of Hezbollah are still Iran and Syria.

An yet again other cites do mention that indeed Hezbollah is part of the government but once again, a minority:

http://www.cfr.org/publication/9155/hezbollah_aka_hizbollah_hizbullah.html

Really, the evidence so far shows an up and growing power group in Lebanon that is delighted that Israel thinks the whole government is in cahoots with them.

[GIGObuster]

@FinnAgain

I mean, honestly, even as recently as January 31, 2006, we had the Lebanese Defense Ministry ordering his soldiers to allow a convoy filled with weapons to proceed on to Hezbollah. Now they want to throw up their hands and say “Who? Those Hezbollah folks? Never knew 'em. No idea how they got armed. Big mystery. Totally not our fault.”

From the same link:

In contrast, the Lebanese army has at times confiscated arms shipments to Palestinian organizations based in Lebanon. In December 2005, for instance, after a Palestinian group with ties to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi’s organization, Al-Qaida in Iraq, fired Katyushas at Israel, Lebanon arrested some members of the group and confiscated their weapons.

I don’t think they are pure, only that once again, they are a weak government, that after all is said and done Hezbollah will come up on top. All due to Israel assuming Lebanon is all the same, have we really have come to the point to deny there are different factions in the Lebanese government?

Heck, even their rhetoric doesn’t match up.

So they’re at war with Israel by their own statements, and Hezbollah serves as part of the armed “resistance” and they refuse to crack down on Hezbollah as long as they’re part of the ‘resistance’ fighting their war, and they give Hezbollah weapons, and support, and money, and safe haven… but no, they’re not at all responsible for what Hezbollah does.

Etc, etc, etc…

Now I have to add to your etc, I already said a chunk of the Lebanese government is in favor of of Hezbollah, the Gaza solution should not become the same applied to Lebanon since there are other larger factions still fighting for power.

And the BBC does mention what I figured out myself:

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Piling the pressure on Beirut

Israel’s open-ended onslaught on Lebanon has thrown the fragile Beirut government into disarray, highlighting the stark contradictions at its heart.

Ironically, Israel is punishing and pressuring a largely anti-Syrian government for an action which it blames partly on Syria and Iran, the sponsors and supporters of Hezbollah.

[Nietzsche]

@Noone Special

talk about honest debating!

Followed by

“It was directed to a military target.” Well, as you yourself admitted later, “it” wasn’t exactly directed only at a military target. But hey, attacking civilians as a “diversionary tactic” is OK if you’re fighting against Israel. But if you are Israel, then hitting civilians while targetting legitimate military targets, that have just attacked you on your sovereign territory,…

You do a fine job of proving the old adage that it takes one to know one.
Care to mention that this “cross border attack” was in the Shebaa Farms area? Which means it is not “your sovereign territory.” Which means the attack was nowhere near terrorism. Which means your country’s response of attacking the civilian infrastructure of Lebanon is the act of terrorism, not the taking of enemy soldiers on occupied land as prisoners.

[FinnAgain]

@Nietzsche

You do a fine job of proving the old adage that it takes one to know one.

Right back atcha.

@Nietzsche

Care to mention that this “cross border attack” was in the Shebaa Farms area?

Care to mention that it was accross the border? Or was the Prime Minister lying?

Care to play straight and admit that Hezbollah attacked the Israeli town of Shlomi? That town which, ya know, is on the other side of the border from Lebanon?

@Nietzsche

Which means it is not “your sovereign territory.”

Care to point to Shlomi on a map? You’ll have a very hard time if you’re not using a map of Israel, I’m afraid.

We can safely disregard the rest of your statements, as they’re based on ignorance, right?

@Nietzsche

Which means your country’s response of attacking the civilian infrastructure of Lebanon

Cite? Or is this more rhetoric on the level of saying that if you’re knocking out power to a region you might have to invade, you’re really targeting civilians?

@Nietzsche

is the act of terrorism, not the taking of enemy soldiers on occupied land as prisoners.

Nice that you leave out the attacks targeted against Israeli civilians which came before the Israeli incursion into Lebanon. :rolleyes: And, by the way, kidnapping and killing Israeli soldiers on Israel land is still a clear casus belli.

Gigo: The whole government has, time and again, refused to do anything about Lebanon. While providing them with support.

At what point does a continued pollicy of allowing Hezbollah to exist, and indeed, continuing to support their status as an armed and violent group have consequences?

@GIGO

From the same link

Which proves my point. When they want to, they can crack down on terrorists.

@GIGO

I don’t think they are pure, only that once again, they are a weak government, that after all is said and done Hezbollah will come up on top. All due to Israel assuming Lebanon is all the same, have we really have come to the point to deny there are different factions in the Lebanese government?

I don’t agree with your gloss, at all. They don’t have to assume that the Lebanese are fungible, merely that their government is doing absolutely nothing to stop Hezbollah. What would be the better solution, a UN force to invade southern Lebanon?

If the Defense Minister is giving weapons to Hezbollah, doesn’t that imply some sort of complicity?

Again, if members of the US government and US military armed a group and then had them launch an attack against another nation… would that nation not be justified in declaring war against the United States? Especially if our government refused to deal with the terrorists and their backers? Weakness in another government stops being an excuse once your civilians are being targeted for death.

@GIGO

I already said a chunk of the Lebanese government is in favor of of Hezbollah, the Gaza solution should not become the same applied to Lebanon since there are other larger factions still fighting for power.

Again, how many actual actions have been taken, and not rhetoric? Has the government been actually opposed to Hezbollah, or only in text? How much of a government needs to fund, equip, and support a terrorist group before that group can be said to have state sponsorship? Before that state is complicit?

Lebanon has had chance, after chance, after chance, after chance to crack down on Hezbollah.

Either they are incompetent, in which case the UN should invade and deal with a terrorist state. Or they are complicit, and then Israel is justified in launching defensive operations.

And, as for your BBC opinion piece, again, even if the folks in Lebanon are anti Syria, doesn’t mean they’re anti-Hezbollah. Or, again, have they taken any actions to disarm Hezbollah, or only rhetoric?

Talk is cheap.

[GIGObuster]

@FinnAgain

Lebanon has had chance, after chance, after chance, after chance to crack down on Hezbollah.

Either they are incompetent, in which case the UN should invade and deal with a terrorist state. Or they are complicit, and then Israel is justified in launching defensive operations.

And, as for your BBC opinion piece, again, even if the folks in Lebanon are anti Syria, doesn’t mean they’re anti-Hezbollah. Or, again, have they taken any actions to disarm Hezbollah, or only rhetoric?

Talk is cheap.

Indeed, why ignore the fact that those factions were at each other’s throats a few years ago? While I do agree in bombing Hezbollah targets, the idea that all factions deserve the same is still folly.

[FinnAgain]

Groups can be at each other’s throats, and still support or turn a blind eye to a terrorist faction.

You also can’t exactly invade a nation without paying attention to its military assets.

Again, for the third of fourth time, can you point to any actions that the Lebanese government has taken to oppose Hezbollah? Have they stopped the flow of weapons? Money? Have they tried to evict Hezbollah? Have they done anything?

Past a certain point, even if it’s only a ‘few bad apples’ that are sponsoring terroism on behalf of their state, it’s still the state’s fault.

And, again, if elements in the US government and military used a proxy force to attack another nation, should they be barred from attacking us back? Would they have to target only that proxy force? The military officers who authorized it? The government officials who got behind it? Or could they take the attack as a clear casus belli and respond as if we’d started a war?

Or are divisions in a government enough to forstall any defensive military actions? Doesn’t that strike you as the perfect get out of jail free card? You finance, equip, house, and support terrorists… and then when they attack their target, you throw up your hands and feign ignorance?

Can you, pr’aps, help me out here and define how you view complicity so we can get on the same page?

[Nietzsche]

@FinnAgain

Care to mention that it was accross the border? Or was the Prime Minister lying?

I was referring to the where the soldiers were, not the rocket attacks. If you’ve got a cite saying the soldiers were in Israel proper, please share.

Care to play straight and admit that Hezbollah attacked the Israeli town of Shlomi? That town which, ya know, is on the other side of the border from Lebanon?

Which occured after Israel entered Lebanon to get their soldiers. How come it’s okay for Israel to “defend itself” but not Lebanon?

Cite? Or is this more rhetoric on the level of saying that if you’re knocking out power to a region you might have to invade, you’re really targeting civilians?

Unreal. Cite? How about Article 2 of the Geneva Convention? Or does that not apply because “the poor Israelis are just defending themselves?”

And, by the way, kidnapping and killing Israeli soldiers on Israel land is still a clear casus belli.

My understanding is that the soldiers killed and taken prisoner were in the Shebaa Farms region (as were some of the rockets fired).

[DSeid]

So what is going to happen from here?

Will Syria step up to defend little brother Lebanon? Will Israel expand into an all out war with Syria as well, especially since they really pull the strings? Will Iran get involved? Would that give I srael an opportunity to take out the nascant Iranian nuclear capacity? At what cost?

As I posted early on, this is not the way I would have played the hand if I was Olmert, but I understand why this is a reasoned response. If you are going to disengage behind a Fence you have to let your neighbors know that this Fence is definite line in the sand. Cross it yourself or by proxy with bodies or with rockets at your grave peril.

But while that is an important message to get clearly understood for future stabilty, this is a scary moment in time. This could go very badly for all involved.

[FinnAgain]

Good gods! Is there any reason you can’t read a newspaper before arguing a position? We’re supposed to be fighting ignorance, not using it as a club.

@Nietzsche

I was referring to the where the soldiers were, not the rocket attacks. If you’ve got a cite saying the soldiers were in Israel proper, please share.

Seriously, it’d help if you’d read the news before getting into this debate. This is just frustrating. [

BEIRUT, Lebanon - Hezbollah militants crossed into Israel on Wednesday and captured two Israeli soldiers.

](http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060712/ap_on_re_mi_ea/lebanon_israel_clash)

And what it that dodge supposed to prove, anyway? An act of war is no longer an act of war if it’s in the 1968 boundaries?

@Nietzsche

Which occured after Israel entered Lebanon to get their soldiers. How come it’s okay for Israel to “defend itself” but not Lebanon?

What military targets, exactly, are in Shlomi? :rolleyes: Shall we get the discussion away from this intellectually dishonest dodge?

And, in addition to newspaper articles, you might want to read the thread. GIGO already posted a cite, that you’ve seen fit to ignore in order to make your dishonest talking points. Here, I’ll show it to you again.

According to the Israeli version, a Hezbollah raiding party had sneaked across the border early in the morning and planted landmines on a road used by Israeli Humvees, killing three of the reconnaissance patrol and capturing two near the border town of Shtula.

“They placed explosive devices on the road, the Humvees drove on to them and then they fired an anti-tank missile,” an IDF spokeswoman said.

Simultaneously, Katyusha rockets were fired at Israeli villages and army posts in the area, injuring five civilians in what appears to have been a diversionary ploy.

Cross border. Civilian targeted. Both before and after Israel’s retaliation.

@Nietzsche

Unreal. Cite? How about Article 2 of the Geneva Convention? Or does that not apply because “the poor Israelis are just defending themselves?”

Indeed it’s unreal… that you’d think such an obvious act of evasion would fool anybody. The real question, if you remember, was about your claim that Israel was targeting civilian infrastructure. Instead of answering that with a cite, you obfuscate and switch the topic.

“Israel is attacking civilian infrastructure.”
“They are? Cite?”
“Hey, look over there!”

And, if you’re curious, there are several GC’s. Four and two procotols, to be exact. It would behove you to state which one you’re citing. If, ya know, you’re trying to make a point.

If, for instance, you were trying to cite the Fourth Geneva Convention on the rights of civilians in war, you’ve gotten it rather wrong. What does the second article actually say?

@GC IV

In addition to the provisions which shall be implemented in peace-time, the present Convention shall apply to all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them.

The Convention shall also apply to all cases of partial or total occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party, even if the said occupation meets with no armed resistance.

Although one of the Powers in conflict may not be a party to the present Convention, the Powers who are parties thereto shall remain bound by it in their mutual relations. They shall furthermore be bound by the Convention in relation to the said Power, if the latter accepts and applies the provisions thereof.

And then you could actually attempt to prove your point rather than evading providing proof for your earlier claim, discussing a nonsequitor, and then refusing to even prove that whichever GC you’re citing here actually applies to what you’re saying. Because, ya know, the 2nd article of the 4th convention has virtually nothing to do with what you’re saying, nor is it the cite that was requested, one proving that Israel is targeting civilian infrastructure.

As it stands, the reason isn’t that anything about the “poor Israelis” , but that a poor argument is being made, by fiat. Not very convincing, especially if you can’t even point out which Geneva Convention you’re citing. Or why it applies in this situation. Or which actions, as still uncited by you, you’re using it to refer to.

@Nietzsche

My understanding is that the soldiers killed and taken prisoner were in the Shebaa Farms region (as were some of the rockets fired).

Again, your understanding would’ve been helped by getting informed before you decided to argue from a position of ignorance. Virtually every, single source, including Al Jazira has stated it was a cross border raid.

[Noone_Special]

@Nietzsche

You do a fine job of proving the old adage that it takes one to know one.
Care to mention that this “cross border attack” was in the Shebaa Farms area? Which means it is not “your sovereign territory.” Which means the attack was nowhere near terrorism. Which means your country’s response of attacking the civilian infrastructure of Lebanon is the act of terrorism, not the taking of enemy soldiers on occupied land as prisoners.

So, who’s lying through their teeth now?
Please take a look at this article. Look at the map and where it points. Look at this statement:

@Christian Science Monitor

Although Hizbullah occasionally attacks Israeli military positions in the Shebaa Farms, it rarely admits to operations elsewhere along the 70-mile frontier.

(bolding mine)
and tell me what that implies to you.

What’s more, I think you knew that. Liar.

[FinnAgain]

Noone Special: Good catch. Here I thought he was just obfuscating and ignoring where attacks happened, but it does, indeed, seem that he’s not aware of geography.

Heck, when even United Nations Security Council Resolution 1583 confirms previous resolutions which say that the blue line is valid in the Shebaa Farms area, there’s really not much of an argument that your average anti-Israel folks can launch.

[Noone_Special]

Oh, another cite? You’ll discount it as coming from an Israeli source, of course, but what can I do…

@YnetNews

The terrorists fired RPG shells at an IDF Hummer jeep traveling **in the Zarit **area near the security fence, considered to be a weak spot due to its location.

Following the attack on the Hummer, Hizbullah terrorists crossed the border into Israel. During the raid three IDF reserve soldiers were killed and two others were wounded – one sustained light injuries while the other was seriously wounded; the Hizbullah members also managed to kidnap two more IDF soldiers (one of the soldiers abducted was the Hummer’s driver) into Lebanese territory.

You can see the full article here

If you want to know where Zarit is, open the following UNIFIL map (PDF) – it’s near the bottom left-hand corner, at roughly 714E/665N. Nowhere near the Shabaa farms!

[Noone_Special]

OK, sorry for so many posts, but I have to point out, that even had the hizballah attach taken place on the Shabaa Farms, it would still have been a cross-border attack, into territory recognized by UN as Israeli-held Syrian territory – not Lebanese.

From here:

@CNN

Under the treaty that ended Lebanon’s 15-year civil war in 1990, Hezbollah was allowed to retain its weaponry to fight Israeli troops in southern Lebanon. It says it won’t disarm until Israeli troops leave the disputed Shebaa Farms region near the Syria border, which the United Nations recognizes as Syrian territory.

(bolding mine)

Incidentally, this little snippet also puts to lie the Lebanese assertion that they have nothing to do with Hizballah attacks on Israel (“allowed to retain its weaponry to fight Israeli troops in southern Lebanon”), but hey, why spoil a good argument with facts? :rolleyes:

[tomndebb]

TWEEEEEET!

Everyone back off on the personal comments.

I agree that this is an extremely contentious issue, but it will not be resolved (and no one will earn debating points for their side) by trying to make every disagreement a matter of moral failure on the part of one’s opponent.

Stick to presentations and refutations of fact and leave the personal observations out of it.

[ /Moderating ]