Where is CNN coverage of Hezbollah fighters in action?

[pantom]

:smack:

Ah, I see you said “to me”, so correction taken back.
Sorry about that.
Have a nice life.

[FinnAgain]

No, you’re not desperate to start a fight.
Not you.

Fuck off already.

[FinnAgain]

In any case, I’m done with this thread. I’ve certainly got better things to do hang out in a thread whose pattern seems to be have become debate-by-name-calling and willful ignorance of the facts. I know this is the Pit, but this sort of behavior is disgusting even here.

I’ll be wandering back to GD, where if someone wants to refute something they’ll actually provide proof rather than making shit up and talking about how someone’s neurons aren’t firing if they actually read the news.

Not every thread needs to be a race to the bottom.

[gum]

Is this considered proof? :

The British Broadcasting Corp. (BBC) has admitted that many of the victims of Israeli retaliation in Lebanon are terrorists and not innocent civilians. A BBC reporter said he saw Hizbullah terrorists using a private home and added, “It is difficult to quantify who is a terrorist and who is a civilian.”

---

To Alessan, I’m so sorry, man. Please stay safe. Will you tell your mother I’m thinking of her?

[clairobscur]

@elucidator

So who’s to say that the Lebanese army isn’t Hizbollah’s bitch?.

As far as I understand it, there’s no Lebanese army to speak of. Their most recent tank was given by Jordan and dates back from the 50s. Their most modern anti-aircraft guns dates back from the Korea war, the rest from WWII. Not all soldiers even have a gun.

[Zeriel]

@FinnAgain

So it is accurate to say that as long as Israel cannot attack Hezbollah without killing more civilians than terrorists, and since it will never ever be able to do that, Israel should never attack Hezbollah. And so, in terms of defending itself, it should do nothing, right?

It can make requests for international aid and such, but in terms of boots-on-the-ground, bombs-hitting-terrorists, the answer is non-action. Yes?

This is the part where I have to jump in and stop the train. Surely there’s a response between “non-action” and “heavy indirect-fire attacks on civilian areas”.

And yes, I WOULD rather Israel used more bloody urban fighting and targeted special-forces operations than this kind of willy-nilly heavy military crap. Frankly, I think I’m looking out for Israel’s existence here, in that I don’t believe Israel has the native capability yet to survive without giving at least some thought to placating ally nations in the international community.

I’ll be more concrete and more forgiving than 'luci. I currently disapprove of Israel using air, naval, and ground-based artillery bombardment to attack Hizbollah targets in civilian areas. I STRONGLY disapprove of Israel using same to attack civilian and government targets in non-Hizbollah-controlled areas. I would approve of commando and paratrooper raids on Hizbollah targets with a minimum of civilian casualties and infrastructure damage (‘minimum’ here being VERY situational), or of urban combat with regular troops in particularly concentrated areas of opposition. I’d also approve of assassinations of Lebanese government and military officials who took positions or actions favoring Hizbollah and any other extra-governmental groups.

Essentially, I want to see Israel hold the moral high ground more firmly. Having friends in northern Israel, I still feel that way. Were I to live in northern Israel, I’d still feel that way.

[yojimbo]

@gum

Is this considered proof? :

The British Broadcasting Corp. (BBC) has admitted that many of the victims of Israeli retaliation in Lebanon are terrorists and not innocent civilians. A BBC reporter said he saw Hizbullah terrorists using a private home and added, “It is difficult to quantify who is a terrorist and who is a civilian.”

Cite?

At least 372 Lebanese, the great majority civilians, have been killed during the conflict, which is now into its 13th day. Thirty-seven Israelis have been killed, about half of them civilians.

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Rice holds key talks in Lebanon

Slightly earlier story as per update times.

At least 362 Lebanese, many of them civilians, and 37 Israelis - about half of them civilians - have been killed since the violence erupted 13 days ago.

BBC NEWS | UK | UK Politics | Blair facing pressure over Israel

That took me about two minutes. Can’t find your ‘story’ though.

Was this someone on a radio show doing an opinion piece or just reporting on what people have said?

[kezami]

@gum

Is this considered proof? :

The British Broadcasting Corp. (BBC) has admitted that many of the victims of Israeli retaliation in Lebanon are terrorists and not innocent civilians. A BBC reporter said he saw Hizbullah terrorists using a private home and added, “It is difficult to quantify who is a terrorist and who is a civilian.”

---

To Alessan, I’m so sorry, man. Please stay safe. Will you tell your mother I’m thinking of her?

Here is proof!

Fucking cowards is right!

[RedFury]

@kezami

Here is proof!

Fucking cowards is right!

Why don’t you throw “animals” in there as well, Surely you’ll feel even more justified in giving those pompoms a second wind:

Alan “Torture is OK” Dershowitz is annoyed that the Israelis have been accused of killing innocent civilians. He is now arguing that there are degrees of “civilianity.” He wonders how many innocent civilians killed by Israel in Lebanon would still be innocent if we could make finer distinctions.

(He should read the Lebanese newspapers and he would get the answer. One third of those killed by the Israelis are children. I’d guess they are all civilian all the time. And then there are the families, like the Canadian women, children and men blown up at Aitaroun. I suppose they are really civilians. Etc. )

But I don’t know why Dershowitz stops there. Let me reformulate his argument for him. Shouldn’t we recognize degrees of humanness? After all, isn’t that the real problem? That the enemy is considered a full human being in the law of war? That horrible Supreme Court judgment that Hamdan had to be given a trial of some sort was based on the misunderstanding that he is a human being.

Israeli officials have already showed us how Arabs can be reclassified away from a full “human” category that they clearly, in the view of the Kadima government, do not deserve.

*For instance, Israeli ambassador to the United Nations Dan Gillerman angrily denounced Kofi Annan for neglecting this key fact. The Guardian reports, ’ Mr Gillerman said “something very important was missing” from Mr Annan’s speech: any mention of terrorism. Hizbullah were “ruthless indiscriminate animals”, he told reporters. *’

So you see, one reason that you can just bomb the hell out of the Lebanese in general is that they aren’t human beings at all. They are “animals.” You might quibble that Gillerman is only referring to members of the Hizbullah party as animals, not all Lebanese. But most Shiite Lebanese, some 45 percent of the population, support Hizbullah. And the Lebanese government, made up of Christians, Sunnis and Druze, let Hizbullah into the Lebanese government and gave it cabinet posts. So probably those who tolerate Hizbullah are at most half-human. This has yet to be worked out. It might be possible to declare them .66 animal. Or maybe they are just all animals. They speak Arabic, after all, right Mr. Gillerman?

[yojimbo]

Nothing new there RedFury. The dehumanisation of one’s enemy is used throughout history and from all quarters. It makes killing them and justifying those actions easier. See the US attitude to Japanese in WWII and visa versa, Nazi’s => Jews/Russians, Slavery, Japan => China WWII and on and on …

[gum]

@yojimbo

Nothing new there RedFury. The dehumanisation of one’s enemy is used throughout history and from all quarters. It makes killing them and justifying those actions easier. See the US attitude to Japanese in WWII and visa versa, Nazi’s => Jews/Russians, Slavery, Japan => China WWII and on and on …

Mm mm.
Especially when it is done by some of these darn righties like Jan Egeland and Kim Howell, huh.

In an interview with the BBC Mr Howells [British foreign minister] said Britain recognised Israel’s need to defend itself, described Hezbollah as a “terrorist” group and criticised it for hiding missiles and fighters in civilian areas.

He also called on Russia, China, Saudi Arabia and Egypt to put pressure on Iran, widely accused of arming Hezbollah.

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Israelis back border force plan

[yojimbo]

@gum

Mm mm.
Especially when it is done by some of these darn righties like Jan Egeland and Kim Howell, huh.

Every side does it, no question about it.

In an interview with the BBC Mr Howells [British foreign minister] said Britain recognised Israel’s need to defend itself, described Hezbollah as a “terrorist” group and criticised it for hiding missiles and fighters in civilian areas.

He also called on Russia, China, Saudi Arabia and Egypt to put pressure on Iran, widely accused of arming Hezbollah.

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Israelis back border force plan

So the BBC didn’t admit or say anything. A British minister said it. I have to say that I’d be surprised if anyone disagreed with the criticising Hezbollah for using civilian areas and wanting any pressure that could be brought on them to happen.

I also wouldn’t disagree with Mr. Howell’s other statement

Foreign Office minister Kim Howells has criticised Israel’s bombardment of Lebanon, while on a visit to Beirut.

He said Israel had not carried out “surgical strikes” and attacking the Lebanese nation was not the answer.

BBC NEWS | World | Middle East | Israelis back border force plan

Israel can kill Hezbollah till the cows come home AFAIC. They are valid targets. The level of destruction however can’t be just blamed on terrorist operations close to civilian populations. Israel has without question in my opinion gone down the road of collective punishment. This is wrong, barbaric and in the mid to long term actually detrimental to the Israeli cause IMO.

Hezbollah are wrong and barbaric as well BTW and as I’ve said if Israel were taking them out rather than killing them rather than killing hundreds of civilians and taking out infrastructure which will leave the Lebanon and it’s people in the shit for many a year to come they’d have my full support.

[yojimbo]

@gum

Mm mm.
Especially when it is done by some of these darn righties like Jan Egeland and Kim Howell, huh.

Actually on re-reading this I don’t see what you mean.

Jan Egeland has said

he UN’s top humanitarian official Jan Egeland has described Israel’s month-long military offensive in Gaza as a “disproportionate use of force”.

Mr Egeland, who is in Gaza to assess the damage, said he was shocked by the targeting of civilian infrastructure including Gaza’s only power plant.

…snip…

“This is very clear, a disproportionate use [of power],” Mr Egeland told reporters.

“Civilian infrastructure is protected. The law is very clear. You cannot have any interpretation in any other way.”

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Gaza offensive 'disproportionate'

[gum]

Not that I’m particulary interested at what Mr. Egeland says - or didn’t say - he did mention this:

A day after criticizing Israel for “disproportionate” strikes against civilians, Egeland accused Hezbollah of “cowardly blending” among women and children.

“I heard they were proud because they lost very few fighters and that it was the civilians bearing the brunt of this,” he said. “I don’t think anyone should be proud of having many more children and women dead than armed men.”

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/07/25/MIDEAST.TMP

[yojimbo]

Fair enough. The tactic is disgraceful no doubt about it. Is anyone actually saying that it isn’t though. The only thing I really see people talking about is proportionality.

Destroying a whole country is pretty bad as well however no matter who started it or if you started out on the moral high ground, which Israel certainly occupied.

[Caparazon]

@Sam Stone

Hezbollah, which Israel is clearly at war with, is comprised largely of Lebanese civilians. It operates with the blessing of the Lebanese government, received government aid to help it arm itself. It was elected into the government by the people of Lebanon. When Israel demanded that Lebanon’s army do something about Hezbollah, it refused. The U.N. passed a Security Council resolution demanding that Hezbollah be disarmed, which was ignored. 1300 feckless U.N. peacekeepers did absolutely nothing.

If the rules of engagement are, “Hey, it’s not the fault of the people of Lebanon, so no matter what Hezbollah does to you, your response must be mild and limited”, then that’s just an invitation for more of the same. You allow those to become the de facto rules of conflict, and Israel’s enemies suddenly have a huge tactical advantage.

The US army, which Iraq, Afghanistan are clearly at war with, is comprised largely of american citizens. It operates with the blessing of the american goverment, received goverment aid to help it arm itself…

Don’t you see that using that excuse to “turn lebanon clock 20 years”, can be use to nuke New York?, (or at least to crash a couple of airplanes there).-
If you hold the people of lebanon responsable for the crimes or negligences of their goverment, then you have to hold american citizens responsable for the deeds of their’s.-
In fact american citizens are more to blame because the U.S. has an stronger democracy than Lebanon.
The same goes for everyone… there will be no innocents in this planets.-

Another thing that I find funny is that you accuse Lebanon of not complying with a U.N resolution: if that is a crime even Trinidad y Tobago must be cleansed with nuclear holocaust.-
Is Israel record innocent of this transgression?
Are the U.S. innocent? Argentina? France? The U.K.?
Of course you will answer that Israel always comply with the security council… after all whenever it wants to condem israel the U.S uses it’s veto privilege. Alas for the lebanes that don’t have such a good sponsor.

[Caparazon]

[QUOTE=Sam Stone]
And let’s not forget Britain starting a war over the Falkland Islands. Do you think that was just about that far-away piece of rock? No. It was about sending a message to the world that Britain’s borders WILL be defended. It is the duty of a sovereign state to do so.

[QUOTE]

Before using that example please google “Un resolution 2065 1966”. In that resolution The UN stated that Falkland island was a colonial problem between Argentina and England. According to the UN both countries were forced to negotiate.
The UK refused.-
That resolution still stands. What do you recomend Argentina to do? Nuke Liverpool?
I told you, not even Trinidad y Tobago is inocent.

[gum]

Caparazon, but the Lebanese * do* have powerful sponsors:

The UN on Monday launched a $US150 million aid appeal for strife-torn Lebanon and the US announced its own $US30m package to ease the suffering of civilians

http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/latest/200607251105/58699a6

and

TEHRAN (Fars News Agency)- Parliament Speaker Gholam Ali Haddad Adel stressed the need for all Muslim nations and officials to condemn the Zionist regime and support the oppressed Lebanese and Palestinian people.

http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=8505030184

and

The Lebanese envoy called on all the Muslim and friendly countries to take due action against the Israeli belligerencies and invasion of Lebanon, before it’s too late.

The diplomat praised the Iranian leadership, government and nation for their continued strong support for Lebanon, and appreciated the Islamic Republic for siding with his country ever since the onset of the Islamic Revolution in Iran.

http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=8505030366

And please read this, by Dr Sami Alrabaa. A Kuwaiti:

http://www.kuwaittimes.net/Navariednews.asp?dismode=article&artid=1656304777

[Caparazon]

When I said powerfull I meant a member of the security council because only they have veto power.

[RedFury]

@Caparazon

When I said powerfull I meant a member of the security council because only they have veto power.

Not that it makes any difference whether a resolution against Isratel is passed or not:

In any event, the present altercation is not about Hezbollah. It is about the right of people to defend themselves against unprovoked aggression and violations to their national sovereignty. The two captured Israeli soldiers are completely irrelevant. Israel has many Lebanese prisoners in its jails; that certainly would not justify the Lebanese army marching through Israel destroying everything in its path.

“Sauce for the goose, is sauce for the gander”; we must apply the same standards evenhandedly and without prejudice. Israel has never bothered with a United Nations resolution to justify the current hostilities, and yet, it claims the right to “unilaterally” enforce resolution 1559 (The disarming of Lebanese militias) What sort of farce is that? Israel has stubbornly ignored over 60 UN resolutions in the last 38 years; defying the world body with nearly as much disdain as it snuffs out the lives of innocent Palestinians.

(bolding mine)

yojimbo,

Agreed. Same old, same old. You don’t even have to go as far back as your examples…I can remember reading in the present past much the same thing about the Iraqui Resistance.