Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Deepblue on July 31, 2006, 03:41:35 pm
-
I'm surprised this wasn't already posted.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14099832
About a half hour before he opened fire Friday afternoon at the downtown Seattle Jewish Federation offices, Naveed Afzal Haq's white pickup truck was stopped and cited by a Seattle Police traffic officer before being let go, Seattle Police Chief Gil Kerlikowske said at a press conference this afternoon. The violation was a minor one -- driving on Third Avenue during a time when only buses are allowed on the street during the closure of the Metro's bus tunnel. "There was nothing (Haq) did to arouse the officer's suspicions,' Kerlikowske said.
But within only minutes, Haq was hiding behind a large potted plant in the foyer of an organization he found on the Internet with two recently purchased semi-automatic handguns, waiting to abduct a teenager and force his way into the office.
Once inside the building, Haq, who also carried a large amount of ammunition, started shooting, wounding Dayna Klein, a pregnant woman in the arm.
On Friday, Marla Meislin-Dietrich, a database coordinator for the center, told reporters: "He said, 'I am a Muslim American, angry at Israel,' before opening fire on everyone," "He was randomly shooting at everyone."
Seems like Middle East violence is starting to spill over... Unfortunate.
-
It's just noise in the media frenzy over Israel's war crimes, crimes against Humanity, and atrocities. :rolleyes:
-
I find it rather ironic that the UN had to have an emergency meeting over the deaths of 60 civies due to a building collapse 8 hours after it had been hit, and with video footage proving its use as a hostile base of operations for rocket attacks. :rolleyes:
-
... yes, all the medias fault. :wtf:
I find it rather ironic that the UN had to have an emergency meeting over the deaths of 60 civies due to a building collapse 8 hours after it had been hit, and with video footage proving its use as a hostile base of operations for rocket attacks. :rolleyes:
Alright, could we back up a second here? Who in the hell has come out with conclusive proof of what happened?
-
AFAIK that video footage was rather old.
-
But within only minutes, Haq was hiding behind a large potted plant in the foyer ...with two recently purchased semi-automatic handguns.
What the hell? This is the sort of thing which happens in cartoon and comedy movies. I can't believe it actually worked, that no one went "Hey, look, there' a guy trying to hide behind that plant. Maybe we should go see what he's up to."
-
It's just noise in the media frenzy over Israel's war crimes, crimes against Humanity, and atrocities. :rolleyes:
Somehow I doubt a random nutcase, however reprehensible their actions, counts in the same media standing as a war.
-
In related news Israel invades Pakistan citing Pakistani terrorism as the cause.
-
I find it ironic of the media's reactions to Israel's actions and mistakes during wartime in contrast to the war going on in Iraq. If they made such a big thing out of every incident in Iraq, there'd be no space left for Israel's screw ups...
-
Iraq's same-old stuff. Doesn't get good ratings. Israel's intentional massacre of Lebanese women and children via arial bombardment is nice 'n fresh... gets the juices - and the ratings - going. Likewise, since Israel's been bombarded by those same boring Kassams / Katyushas for the past year / month, it's boring news. Whereas those bloodthirsty IDF barbarians keep on changing their tactics, making things more interesting to watch from the living room across the ocean while the heart bleeds and the mouth consumes more Lemon Diet Coke.
-
... you're really like something out of a movie these days, ya know that Sarnie? Next thing you know we'll all be gay communist journalists...
-
It's just noise in the media frenzy over Israel's war crimes, crimes against Humanity, and atrocities. :rolleyes:
You are *BOTH* committing crimes against humanity and atrocities. Neither of you are innocent, and both of you need to be stopped for your own damn good since all you've both been able to do for the last 50 years is just make things worse each time you've tried to 'solve' it by force.
Where's superman when we need him?
-
It's just noise in the media frenzy over Israel's war crimes, crimes against Humanity, and atrocities. :rolleyes:
You are *BOTH* committing crimes against humanity and atrocities. Neither of you are innocent, and both of you need to be stopped for your own damn good since all you've both been able to do for the last 50 years is just make things worse each time you've tried to 'solve' it by force.
Where's superman when we need him?
Pfft. Where do you stand to judge other nations?
Every war has included atrocities and crimes against humanity. =/
The world media has really done a backflip over this bull**** and realistically highlighted how stupidly influenced and one-sighted the media can and will be.
Personally I respect Israel for doing what they need too and sticking to their guns, (no pun intended) just as other other nations have done, just as the US and coalition did in Iraq. I don't necessarily support the war, but how the hell people can condemn them while doing the same thing is the most highly hypocritcal thing I've seen yet.
It's why the US administration is yet to condemn them, and never will. It's because they're doing the same exact thing. "Defending themselves."
The Lebanon government really needs to gain control of its own borders. It's sad people are dead and dieing it really is. But it is happening in far many more places than just what is shown on TV.
/sorrys if that was slightly ranty
-
You miss the point that we also condemn the US and UK for what they've done in Iraq.
-
In all honesty I was always against any wars.
But I'm starting to reach the conclusion of what else can some people do?
I'm still completely lost as to the real reason why Iraq happened at all. Yet I can see the validity of Israel's attack.
I'd say in Israel's position, they had slightly more reason to defend themselves. I support them more than the war in Iraq.
It all sucks in the end. But I honestly think Israel is in far better position for retaliation than Coalition vs Iraq ever was.
(Shouldn't you also be condemning Australia as well as the US and UK?)
-
You miss the point that we also condemn the US and UK for what they've done in Iraq.
Condemn away then - we're barbaric animals who need that fix of Palestinian (or just regular Arab) blood in the morning before we're really truly awake. We deserve every bit of condemnation, since we're trying to start a war, ruin the lives of millions, and - oh, hey - we prefer having mortars rain down on our towns to the obvious solution of giving them everything they claim they want, because hey, that just makes life so fun!
-
... you're really like something out of a movie these days, ya know that Sarnie? Next thing you know we'll all be gay communist journalists...
No, Sandwich is just pissed the hell off because the media seems so intent on criminalizing Israel that they disregard the fact that Israelis are being killed and otherwise put in harm's way, or that the intentional murder of innocent Israelis isn't as important as the deaths of Lebanese civilians that the IDF had no knowledge of.
If the media can't catch the IDF using Israeli civilians as human shields, then I'm sure they can justify calling them war criminals bent on the cold-blooded murder of the innocent Lebanese populace.
It's just noise in the media frenzy over Israel's war crimes, crimes against Humanity, and atrocities. :rolleyes:
You are *BOTH* committing crimes against humanity and atrocities. Neither of you are innocent, and both of you need to be stopped for your own damn good since all you've both been able to do for the last 50 years is just make things worse each time you've tried to 'solve' it by force.
Where's superman when we need him?
Pfft. Where do you stand to judge other nations?
Every war has included atrocities and crimes against humanity. =/
The world media has really done a backflip over this bull**** and realistically highlighted how stupidly influenced and one-sighted the media can and will be.
Personally I respect Israel for doing what they need too and sticking to their guns, (no pun intended) just as other other nations have done, just as the US and coalition did in Iraq. I don't necessarily support the war, but how the hell people can condemn them while doing the same thing is the most highly hypocritcal thing I've seen yet.
Finally, someone else besides Sandwich starts to make some sense in this thread.
... you're really like something out of a movie these days, ya know that Sarnie? Next thing you know we'll all be gay communist journalists...
I can't believe this. You're not seriously condemning Sandwich for having strong emotions against the media? This is the same media, mind you, that looks at the deaths of Israeli civilians and soldiers and the attacks on Israeli towns and cities and then telling members of the IDF that the blood should be on their hands.
Maybe the rest of the world should stop being so damned hypocritical and give back some of its own stolen possessions--that goes for Northern Ireland, Chechnya, Tibet, and Puerto Rico in particular. Then perhaps we'll talk MidEast politics.
-
You miss the point that we also condemn the US and UK for what they've done in Iraq.
Condemn away then - we're barbaric animals who need that fix of Palestinian (or just regular Arab) blood in the morning before we're really truly awake. We deserve every bit of condemnation, since we're trying to start a war, ruin the lives of millions, and - oh, hey - we prefer having mortars rain down on our towns to the obvious solution of giving them everything they claim they want, because hey, that just makes life so fun!
Way to try and create a strawman.
-
Oh god. Every bloody topic about the Israel conflict is full of hypocrisy and double-sided morale. Topics like this should be locked.
-
Why, what do you find double sided?
-
Condemn away then - we're barbaric animals who need that fix of Palestinian (or just regular Arab) blood in the morning before we're really truly awake. We deserve every bit of condemnation, since we're trying to start a war, ruin the lives of millions, and - oh, hey - we prefer having mortars rain down on our towns to the obvious solution of giving them everything they claim they want, because hey, that just makes life so fun!
Yeah. You're just like the other side. After all they aren't human they're muslims. They have the muslim mindset. They couldn't possibly want peact. They couldn't possibly want security. They couldn't possibly want to have a picnic on the beach without getting blown up. All the Palestinians care about is finishing Hitler's work right?
What absolute bollocks. The fact is that the media doesn't make us hate Israel. I don't hate Israel. I don't think you're evil or monsters but the fact is that you need to realise that after 50 years of this **** you are no closer to solving the problem than you were at the start. And if you keep doing this you'll be no closer in another 50 years time. And the only way that will happen is if Israel realise that they are a big part of the problem.
-
Oh god. Every bloody topic about the Israel conflict is full of hypocrisy and double-sided morale. Topics like this should be locked.
See this is why I don't like you as an admin. Sorry Fury, but that post was no better than the "PostCount++;" ones made earlier.
I can't believe this. You're not seriously condemning Sandwich for having strong emotions against the media? This is the same media, mind you, that looks at the deaths of Israeli civilians and soldiers and the attacks on Israeli towns and cities and then telling members of the IDF that the blood should be on their hands.
As far as I can tell the media is simply reporting the situation as it is. While Hezbollah are firing rockets into Israel and causing in the region of 100 deaths (or just under), the Israelis are firing heavy ordinance into Lebanon and killing about 600 civilians. Now, if the truth of those numbers makes Israel look bad then its not the medias fault. Then again, I've only watched the BBC for coverage of this so I can't comment on other outlets bias.
I'm condeming Sandwich for being blind to the fact that some in the media are reporting the reality of the situation rather than deliberately spinning it in a way that condems his countrymens actions.
What absolute bollocks. The fact is that the media doesn't make us hate Israel. I don't hate Israel. I don't think you're evil or monsters but the fact is that you need to realise that after 50 years of this **** you are no closer to solving the problem than you were at the start. And if you keep doing this you'll be no closer in another 50 years time. And the only way that will happen is if Israel realise that they are a big part of the problem.
QFT :yes:
-
"While Hezbollah are firing rockets into Israel and causing in the region of 100 deaths (or just under), the Israelis are firing heavy ordinance into Lebanon and killing about 600 civilians."
Hezbollah has been dooing it for years, is aiming for the civilians.
Israel is reacting to an atack, and aiming for rocket launchers wich just so happen to have been placed on top of daycare centers and schools.
someone posted on here that what israel is doing is like going into a crowded room and spraying it with machinegun fire to kill one person hideing there. even exepting that analogy I'd side with that group over the one spraying machinegun fire into a crowded room to kill as many inncent people as posable out of sheer spite.
Why was Hezbollah allowed to use Lebinon as a missle launching base? why is it such a shock that when country A fires missles into country B that country B would retaliate?
-
Why was Hezbollah allowed to use Lebinon as a missle launching base?
That's actually a pretty good damned question. Why exactly to the Lebanese civilians simply allow Hezbollah to set up their rockets right outside their houses and fire off a few, now more than ever?
You can answer that yourselves.
-
someone posted on here that what israel is doing is like going into a crowded room and spraying it with machinegun fire to kill one person hideing there. even exepting that analogy I'd side with that group over the one spraying machinegun fire into a crowded room to kill as many inncent people as posable out of sheer spite.
Even when the option is there to solve the problem without machine gun fire?
You see that's the problem we have with Israel. It's not that they use a military option because they have no choice. It's that they use a military option because they choose not to use a diplomatic one.
-
"While Hezbollah are firing rockets into Israel and causing in the region of 100 deaths (or just under), the Israelis are firing heavy ordinance into Lebanon and killing about 600 civilians."
Hezbollah has been dooing it for years, is aiming for the civilians.
Israel is reacting to an atack, and aiming for rocket launchers wich just so happen to have been placed on top of daycare centers and schools.
someone posted on here that what israel is doing is like going into a crowded room and spraying it with machinegun fire to kill one person hideing there. even exepting that analogy I'd side with that group over the one spraying machinegun fire into a crowded room to kill as many inncent people as posable out of sheer spite.
Why was Hezbollah allowed to use Lebinon as a missle launching base? why is it such a shock that when country A fires missles into country B that country B would retaliate?
Why ask which act is worse when the side-effect of both is death? Is the death of 700+ civillians with good intentions worse than about 100 with the worst intentions? Does this even matter when innocent people are being killed for no good reason?
EDIT; is there any truth to the rumour (rumour / statement?) that Hezbollah have currently killed more Israeli soldiers than civillians?
-
Let's play the Isreali PM game! (tm)
a) Do nothing. Continued deaths over a long period. Send out a message inviting more.
b) Do something. Lots of deaths. Maybe an end to it.
Please choose.
-
Anyway shouldn't this stuff be in the other thread? :nervous:
-
Anyway shouldn't this stuff be in the other thread? :nervous:
yes
Oh, and you forget the current course of action (by both sides)
c) Do something. Lots of death. Accelerates and perpetuates violence, providing a justification for more and more death for the next 20 years or so.
-
As far as I can tell the media is simply reporting the situation as it is. While Hezbollah are firing rockets into Israel and causing in the region of 100 deaths (or just under), the Israelis are firing heavy ordinance into Lebanon and killing about 600 civilians. Now, if the truth of those numbers makes Israel look bad then its not the medias fault. Then again, I've only watched the BBC for coverage of this so I can't comment on other outlets bias.
I'm condeming Sandwich for being blind to the fact that some in the media are reporting the reality of the situation rather than deliberately spinning it in a way that condems his countrymens actions.
You see, that's (one of) the problem(s) I'm trying to get at here. The BBC is not simply reporting the numbers. They are giving prominence to the Israeli attack on Hezbollah targets, and nearly no room whatsoever to the ongoing barrage of rockets on Israeli towns and cities.
I'm feeling very condemned right now, by the way. I'm liable to get all choked up. There might even be tears.
You see that's the problem we have with Israel. It's not that they use a military option because they have no choice. It's that they use a military option because they choose not to use a diplomatic one.
Wow. I mean, really... wow. You're brilliant. Diplomacy. How did we not think of that one?
Name one time when a diplomatic avenue worked with an Islamic terrorist organization.
Name one time when they took the hand we have had stretched out in peace for the past 58 years.
Name one time when they reneged on their commitment to destroy the "Zionist entity."
Name one time when those f***heads returned one of our kidnapped soldiers alive.
Are you really that blind?
-
Of course Israel has thought of the diplomatic option. They're not willing to do it though because giving back the occupied terratories pisses off voters like yourself who believe you have a God-given right to that land.
And as for the rest of your claims the protestants could have made similar claims about the catholics in Northern Ireland and visa versa.
-
The BBC are giving prominence to an Israeli invasion of Lebanese territory because - guess what - a lot of innocent people are being killed by it. Given that we value lives equally (We do, don't we?), shouldn't coverage be proportionally aligned along with the number of civillian deaths?
Of course, if you look at the BBC lead item (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5233842.stm), it states the number of deaths, and what's most important in the political context, etc. Because the key news here, is not that there are rockets landing on Israel,but that there is an immenent humanitarian disaster, and the possibility of a region-wide conflict.
I'd note, again, that the BBC has given prominent TV coverage to rocket attacks on Israel; but in the present context it is far, far more important in an international context to report what is happening in Lebanon; especially because it's only strengthening support for Hezbollah (and a key part of the political context is the influence Hezbollah has over the people of Lebanon,especially if you actually want to a) have a democratic Lebanon and b) have that Lebanon capable of 'managing' Hezbollah).
EDIT; a side note; the majority of the worlds' opinion being against Israel doesn't constitute support for Hezbollah. It constitutes condemnation for an attack on the civillian population of Lebanon, including the democratic government, in response to the act of a 3rd party terrorist group. We expect Israel, as a free, democratic, stable country, to act to a high moral standard. Many people, I think, view Israels actions as immoral, excessive, self defeating and dangerous for global stability.
-
I'm feeling very condemned right now, by the way. I'm liable to get all choked up. There might even be tears.
Not everyone is condemning you. Some people appreciate the cold difficult decisions life throws at you and that sometimes you're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't. Actually though doesn't that mean you're damned? Is that as bad as being condemned? :)
-
EDIT; a side note; the majority of the worlds' opinion being against Israel doesn't constitute support for Hezbollah. It constitutes condemnation for an attack on the civillian population of Lebanon, including the democratic government, in response to the act of a 3rd party terrorist group. We expect Israel, as a free, democratic, stable country, to act to a high moral standard. Many people, I think, view Israels actions as immoral, excessive, self defeating and dangerous for global stability..
And what power did said government actually have before the invasion? Had the government or army had any control over Hezbollah or actually done anything to keep it quiet, do you really think Israel would have had to invade? Israel knew that the government wouldn't have been able to do anything to control Hezbollah, and the only force that was going to stop them was Israel.
Of course Israel has thought of the diplomatic option. They're not willing to do it though because giving back the occupied terratories pisses off voters like yourself who believe you have a God-given right to that land.
It's not entirely that and you know it, kara. Like Sandwich said, everytime Israel gives land back, organizations such as Hamas move in and use the newly-acquired territory to further their attacks on Israel. As a result, more Israelis die, and more Palestinians die as a result of the Israeli counterattack.
Whether the Palestinians want Israel wiped off the map makes no difference; they just happen to be the group in closest proximity to Israel. Iran's still calling for the utter destruction of Israel, and has furthered this by funding and supplying Hezbollah. Same goes with Syria. The Palestinians that voted in the peace-seeking government ( :rolleyes: ) might not want Israel destroyed, but a lot of other Arab countries still do.
Israel at the very least attempts to do something for peace; they've been giving up land, haven't they? It's groups such as Hezbollah and other militant organizations that **** the whole thing up and force Israel to take action.
-
EDIT; a side note; the majority of the worlds' opinion being against Israel doesn't constitute support for Hezbollah. It constitutes condemnation for an attack on the civillian population of Lebanon, including the democratic government, in response to the act of a 3rd party terrorist group. We expect Israel, as a free, democratic, stable country, to act to a high moral standard. Many people, I think, view Israels actions as immoral, excessive, self defeating and dangerous for global stability..
And what power did said government actually have before the invasion? Had the government or army had any control over Hezbollah or actually done anything to keep it quiet, do you really think Israel would have had to invade? Israel knew that the government wouldn't have been able to do anything to control Hezbollah, and the only force that was going to stop them was Israel.
Well, now they have precisely bugger all power, and any chance they did have of organizing a peaceful disarmament and democratisation of Hezbollan has been well and truly destroyed. In fact, I would not be surprised if the next elections didn't see a Hezbollah majority.
After all, the whole problem ws that the government of Lebanon was too weak to assert itself 'over' Hezbollah, because doing so would see a civil war. But the way to correct that is not to strengthen Hezbollah by giving them the justification to exist, but to support and reinforce the democractic process and elected government.
-
The problem is that Hezbollah is calling the shots. They know that Israel will defend her citizens, so they ensure that the targetted damage Israel metes out damages innocent civilians, and has plenty of media coverage, to boot.
Anyway, this should continue in that other thread. The original topic of this thread is more relevant to this: http://www.dansimmons.com/news/message/2006_04.htm
-
Oh good, a story effectively calling for the extermination of an entire race of people (and the removal of basic freedoms in facilitating this) because they are 'a threat'.
Where have i heard that before?
-
It's merely one man's fictional projection of a possible future. Does it bother you? Scary, ain't it?
-
It's merely one man's fictional projection of a possible future. Does it bother you? Scary, ain't it?
Yes, but not in the sense you're thinking........
-
well neither party has taken that opption, so I'm still forced to chose between the two opptions 'kill innocent to get guilty' vs 'kill innocent for it's own sake'. nobody there has decided to take the 'don't ever kill innocent' opption so I can't use that, the only opptions I have are 'bad things for good reasons' or 'bad things for bad reasons' when I am forced to choose support for one of these two groups I must choose the lesser of the two evils, or support neither.
[edit]wow, I like totaly missed the second page... :nervous:
-
Why ask which act is worse when the side-effect of both is death?no, the side effect of one of them is death the other it's the one and only goal, just because they aren't very good at it I don't think should weight into the judgement of wich side to come down on
Is the death of 700+ civillians with good intentions worse than about 100 with the worst intentions? yes
Does this even matter when innocent people are being killed for no good reason? not sure what you mean, rephase please
-
Well, does it really matter which is morally better when both are wrong?
-
yes, in a situation were both parties are wrong I feel it is important to make judgements based on wich you feel is more wrong (assumeing you can make such a determineation), after all you don't punish speeders with the same penalties as pedophiles.
-
yes, in a situation were both parties are wrong I feel it is important to make judgements based on wich you feel is more wrong (assumeing you can make such a determineation), after all you don't punish speeders with the same penalties as pedophiles.
Isn't it more important to stop people dying, then appoportion blame, though?
-
yes, in a situation were both parties are wrong I feel it is important to make judgements based on wich you feel is more wrong (assumeing you can make such a determineation), after all you don't punish speeders with the same penalties as pedophiles.
But you do punish both. That's the point we're trying to get across.
-
I would of probably agreed with you guys (kara and aldo) some time ago, and still do to some extent. But I think I've come to a state where I think of myself more of a realist. In some cases diplomacy is just too idealistic to work. It's a sad fact of life. It's a sad fact of humanity.
Perhaps both sides could of put more effort into diplomacy. The same could be said for Afganistan or Iraq, or any other conflict known to man. It is far more easier to encourage and demand diplomacy from the safe side of the world (so to speak) I think than it is to be there and experiencing said things.
I can respect Israel for what they've been through, and for surviving in one of the most hostile places on the planet. (even if they may have contributed to that hostility)
You guys do have a point, if the world was a better place, they could just talk it out. But the world isn't unfortunately.
Expecting everyone to just turn around and be friends at the toss of a coin is a blindly optimistic view, and something that is probably never going to happen.
-
The first step to changing the world is believing you can, though. If we just accept the ****tiest things as 'how it works', then we'll never go anywhere except downhill. (Plus, it's not like we've not seen diplomacy work before with sectarian violence)
-
It's not just a case of wild eyed dreaming here. I keep mentioning Northern Ireland because that was a situation that had lasted longer than the Arab-Israeli conflicts and had just as much hatred on both sides (and still has hatred on both sides for that matter) but has been resolved via diplomacy.
No one here is saying that diplomacy is a pancea that will magcally solve the problems in the Middle East but it's a step in the right direction. This is a step in the wrong direction. It won't solve anything. It merely makes the people Israel is trying to beat stronger.
What's really annoying is that Isreal have gone in and stirred up the hornets nest and now expect the rest of the world to go in and take over. Why didn't they ask for that BEFORE this all started when they could have got the Lebonese government to ask for help too?
-
Isn't it more important to stop people dying, then appoportion blame, though?
That may be. However, if Israel stops all her attacks on Hezbollah targets, do you think that Hezbollah will stop firing rockets and return our kidnapped soldiers?
Conversely, if Hezbollah returns our kidnapped soldiers and stops the rocket fire, do you think that Israel would then stop attacking Hezbollah?
What's really annoying is that Isreal have gone in and stirred up the hornets nest and now expect the rest of the world to go in and take over. Why didn't they ask for that BEFORE this all started when they could have got the Lebonese government to ask for help too?
I may have missed something, since I haven't read news in the last day or so, but... is Israel now asking for an external force to come take over? Last I heard was that we vehemently opposed any sort of UN "peacekeeping" force or anything of the sort, due to their utter uselessness in the past. Have I missed some new development?
-
Apparently so given that your government was willing to accept UN forces (based on the requirement that they were NATO led) over a week ago.
-
Isn't it more important to stop people dying, then appoportion blame, though?
That may be. However, if Israel stops all her attacks on Hezbollah targets, do you think that Hezbollah will stop firing rockets and return our kidnapped soldiers?
Conversely, if Hezbollah returns our kidnapped soldiers and stops the rocket fire, do you think that Israel would then stop attacking Hezbollah?
And has this stopped the rocket fire?
Has it made it less likely to reoccur in future?
Or has it created a new recruiting call for future attacks, strengthening Hezbollahs attempts to portray itself as a resistance movement?
Honest question; once Israel decided to invade Gaza, did rocket attacks (Hezbollah or Palestinian origin) increase? (for example, can we regard any significance in todays record barrage, and can we do so versus the vastly reduced attacks during the 48 hour suspension of IAF air-raids?)
What's really annoying is that Isreal have gone in and stirred up the hornets nest and now expect the rest of the world to go in and take over. Why didn't they ask for that BEFORE this all started when they could have got the Lebonese government to ask for help too?
I may have missed something, since I haven't read news in the last day or so, but... is Israel now asking for an external force to come take over? Last I heard was that we vehemently opposed any sort of UN "peacekeeping" force or anything of the sort, due to their utter uselessness in the past. Have I missed some new development?
Olmert has called for a NATO - i.e. ally - force I believe, but yes, peacekeeping forces. Presumably realising how incredibly futile this war is.
-
This sort of incident happens once a year, last year a Neo-Nazi got into a Synagogue in Russia and went on a stabbing spree, before the press tried to blame it on cxomputer games, there are always whackos about, As an aside to the current discussion, I don't think the thing is Lebanon was the reason he did this, I think it was an excuse to do it.
-
Had Israel written off the loss of its soldiers and ignored the initial rocket attacks, would the situation have diminished? Or would the lack of retaliation have been an invitation for every fanatic in the area to an all-you-can-bomb bloodbath? Either way the reaction is going to be negative.
-
The first step to changing the world is believing you can, though. If we just accept the ****tiest things as 'how it works', then we'll never go anywhere except downhill. (Plus, it's not like we've not seen diplomacy work before with sectarian violence)
We can only hope I guess.
Perhaps because of this violence diplomatic solutions will be more strongly desired in the future.
-
Damn it, if you're going to have to be a moronic blade-wielding zealot at least attack a target like the so-called "Discovery Institute" at least take out some of your fellow bad guys while you're at it too.
-
Honest question; once Israel decided to invade Gaza, did rocket attacks (Hezbollah or Palestinian origin) increase? (for example, can we regard any significance in todays record barrage, and can we do so versus the vastly reduced attacks during the 48 hour suspension of IAF air-raids?)
I honestly do not know - I've got no statistics at hand. However, the significance of anything involving Hezbollah is questionable; they are living, thinking human beings who know quite well how to manipulate situations to their advantage. *shrug*
-
Honest question; once Israel decided to invade Gaza, did rocket attacks (Hezbollah or Palestinian origin) increase? (for example, can we regard any significance in todays record barrage, and can we do so versus the vastly reduced attacks during the 48 hour suspension of IAF air-raids?)
I honestly do not know - I've got no statistics at hand. However, the significance of anything involving Hezbollah is questionable; they are living, thinking human beings who know quite well how to manipulate situations to their advantage. *shrug*
Well, what i'm asking is which are they better able to manipulate; (attempted) peace or war?
-
Had Israel written off the loss of its soldiers and ignored the initial rocket attacks, would the situation have diminished? Or would the lack of retaliation have been an invitation for every fanatic in the area to an all-you-can-bomb bloodbath? Either way the reaction is going to be negative.
What? No! Things would have gone on a business per usual. Rocket attacks have been happening for years before now, and while the kidnapping was certainly something new, there is absolutely no reason to believe that the evil terrorist organisation of the world would come together and pile on Israel for no damned reason.
The fact of the matter is, rather than simply responding with a bit of shelling as they usually do, Israel snapped and hit back a thousand fold. An error in judgement? Perhaps. But the fact remains, this didn't start with anything particularly special, and to believe it did is folly. Had Israel sent in a small force [read: covert operation] to try and retrieve the soldiers, and taken the rocket attacks in stride as they usually do, this wouldn't be happening, and the situation would be as bad as it has been for the past umpteen years.
-
Both sides should just hurry up and finish eachother off so the rest of us can get some peace and quiet......