Israel

[Gladys]

Delivery of aid to those that really need it in these circumstances is very difficult and best left to the likes of the UN, NATO etc. Even so, they are likely to walk away rather than inflame a situation. All very frustrating but at least if there is the attempt to get aid in then your hope is that at least some of it will reach those needing it.

 

USAID is not the only aid donor, worth having a look at others, such as some other organisations that have been in Iraq since that particular debacle kicked off!

[P.K.]

It does amuse me the way Rog goads the supporters of that proscribed terrorist organization called Hezbollah. It's like winding up a little clockwork doll.

PK,

 

I would suggest that there are few, if any, on here who support Hezbollah. I think the reason Rog is getting such a hard (and well deserved in my opinion) time on here is due to his absolute disregard for human life. If there is any 'goading' going on it is not directed toward Hezbollah supporters but toward ordinary people who are sickened by the bloodshed and Rog's proclamations of his delight. If you find that amusing then I pity you. I really do.

 

You may be fully hardened to the horrors of war but please try and accept that there are people here who are struggling to come to terms with it and who find the whole thing quite distressing enough without being 'wound up like clockwork dolls'.

I'm thinking here of the idiots like Tugger who are totally in denial that the IDF has a right to defend itself. As I have posted before the supporters of either side do not have a monopoly on compassion. ANY parent will feel for the innocents, as I do. But I guess if you have not been there then it has to be a paradox.

Interesting reading --- and from a disinterested source..

 

The words of a Canadian United Nations observer written just days before he was killed in an Israeli bombing of a UN post in Lebanon are evidence Hezbollah was using the post as a "shield" to fire rockets into Israel, says a former UN commander in Bosnia.

 

Those words, written in an e-mail dated just nine days ago, offer a possible explanation as to why the post -- which according to UN officials was clearly marked and known to Israeli forces -- was hit by Israel on Tuesday night, said retired Maj.-Gen. Lewis MacKenzie yesterday.

 

The strike hit the UN observation post in the southern Lebanese village of El Khiam, killing Canadian Maj. Paeta Hess-von Kruedener and three others serving as unarmed UN military observers in the area.

Just last week, Maj. Hess-von Kruedener wrote an e-mail about his experiences after nine months in the area, words Maj.-Gen. MacKenzie said are an obvious allusion to Hezbollah tactics.

 

"What I can tell you is this," he wrote in an e-mail to CTV dated July 18. "We have on a daily basis had numerous occasions where our position has come under direct or indirect fire from both (Israeli) artillery and aerial bombing.

 

"The closest artillery has landed within 2 meters (sic) of our position and the closest 1000 lb aerial bomb has landed 100 meters (sic) from our patrol base. This has not been deliberate targeting, but rather due to tactical necessity."

 

Those words, particularly the last sentence, are not-so-veiled language indicating Israeli strikes were aimed at Hezbollah targets near the post, said Maj.-Gen. MacKenzie.

 

"What that means is, in plain English, 'We've got Hezbollah fighters running around in our positions, taking our positions here and then using us for shields and then engaging the (Israeli Defence Forces)," he said.

 

That would mean Hezbollah was purposely setting up near the UN post, he added. It's a tactic Maj.-Gen. MacKenzie, who was the first UN commander in Sarajevo during the Bosnia civil war, said he's seen in past international missions: Aside from UN posts, fighters would set up near hospitals, mosques and orphanages.

 

Full article - (Ottawa Citizen Newspaper) http://tinyurl.com/fxaee

If this is your attempt to justify a war crime you can stick it! Despite the UN making 10 telephone calls to the IDF, despite the UN broadcasting in clear language, despite there being no surrounding vegetation around a clearly marked "UN" post hundreds of meters away from any other buildings (with "UN" painted in 6 foot high letters) - the UN observers were still targeted by the IDF and there is no justification for this. It is still a war crime.

 

If you apply your brain, how would you be describing the death of Israeli UN observers should they have been in Africa and were targeted by one of the opposing forces in a war there in a similar UN post? You are deluding yourself.

Oh well, I guess no longer posting it's a "WAR CRIME" is a step in the right direction.

 

Here is something to consider. The IDF fights in uniform. It goes for specific Hezbollah targets. It could bomb any Lebanese town or village flat if it wanted to, but it doesn't. It is mindful of civilian casualties. They are to be avoided if possible but are regrettable if not.

 

Now Hezbollah just don't care. They do not fight in uniform, every Hezbollah casualty is therefore a civilian. They hide amongst the civilians because to them civilian casualties are a win/win.

"Consistently, from the Hezbollah heartland, my message was that Hezbollah must stop this cowardly blending ... among women and children," UN humanitarian affairs chief Jan Egeland said.

 

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

I can well imagine them setting up next to a UN post. If they don't care about their own civilians a bunch of foreigners means even less.

 

Tell you what, why not help their terrorist aims by claiming that the IDF attempts to get at them is a WAR CRIME? I'm sure they will appreciate your efforts.....

[LoneWolf]

Here is something to consider. The IDF fights in uniform. It goes for specific Hezbollah targets. It could bomb any Lebanese town or village flat if it wanted to, but it doesn't. It is mindful of civilian casualties. They are to be avoided if possible but are regrettable if not.

 

I suspect this may be falling on deaf ears PK. Anyone with experience of any of the armed services would or at least should agree with you. People without that experience may have a different view.

[Gladys]

Not very mindful by bombing a civilian target after giving a warning for civilians to get out. Sadly, the civilians had no way of getting out, according to reports.

 

All very well, but who is fighting with whom? The armed services work perfectly well in a democracy, where they are just tools of the peoples' will, as are the governments.

 

I do not support Hezbollah, Hamas, the Israeli state or the IDF, but I do support the civilians on either side who are caught up in the intransigence of their leaders and would just hope that amongst them there is one leader, worth the title, who will take time to reflect what this mess really means for those he is leading.

 

So you guys can talk about military tactics all you like (and Rog can spout his usual offensive bile), but what we need in the Middle East is a humanitarian strategy which I think is beyond the ken of the usual suspects on this particular thread.

[LoneWolf]

All very well, but who is fighting with whom? The armed services work perfectly well in a democracy, where they are just tools of the peoples' will, as are the governments.

I think that is one of the problems Gladys. Israel is the only state in the area which most of us in the West would recognise as a democracy.

 

So you guys can talk about military tactics all you like (and Rog can spout his usual offensive bile), but what we need in the Middle East is a humanitarian strategy which I think is beyond the ken of the usual suspects on this particular thread.

PK is making the valid point the Israeli miltary are exercising restraint [in a military context]. However you are totally correct in that a humanitarian solution has to be found. The prerequisite for that has to be removal of terrorist organisations such as Hezbollah.

In the meantime, what can be done to help those displaced by the consequences of terrorist activity?

In my opinion a massive international aid operation is required. It needs to be done quickly and by the right people.

[Gladys]

Unfortunately, unless there is a ceasefire or suspension of hostilities, nothing substantial can be done on the aid front for obvious reasons. I understand from tonight's news that Israel has offered a temporary ceasefire. Let's hope that will give a window of opportunity to alleviate, in part, the humanitarian problem.

 

But while these problems attract those that argue for and against uniformed (i.e. formally established) forces, the right of one collection of people to have international recognition over another, and the disregard for the impact of those views on the ordinary person in either camp, I don't think this one will be solved very quickly.

 

I posted this way up above, but it is really time for everyone involved to stop, think, and decide what are the real imperatives.

 

Bit of a pipe dream I know, but I am certainly not going into bat for either side. Just for the non-extremists on both sides.

[Albert Tatlock]

Here is something to consider. The IDF fights in uniform. It goes for specific Hezbollah targets. It could bomb any Lebanese town or village flat if it wanted to, but it doesn't. It is mindful of civilian casualties. They are to be avoided if possible but are regrettable if not.

 

I suspect this may be falling on deaf ears PK. Anyone with experience of any of the armed services would or at least should agree with you. People without that experience may have a different view.

I am against both sides in this 'war', against both sides fighting within an evolving democratic state (Lebanon), against both sides refusing to accept the authority of the UN, and against both sides treating civilians as legitimate targets. I think that both the US and Britain have done nothing but totally undermine the authority of the UN during this crisis. Surely you would agree (other than through a major middle eastern conflict which is in nobody's interest) that it is only through the UN, (from a military, financial and negotiation standpoint) that any peace will ever be achieved in the region?

 

The fact that Rog and PK seem to be 'attacked' on this thread (speaking for myself) is purely because of their 'gung-ho let's return to the 70s and 80s solutions' attitude, none of which worked and which left many Arabs, Israelis and UN soldiers dead, and lead to a UN withdrawal. I would equally verbally 'attack' Hezbollah supporters, and would condemn their behaviour equally if they posted on this forum. In point of fact, I hold each sides' religion and objectives in equal contempt because of the misery, horror, death and destruction they have both delivered, carried out in the name of their respective 'god'.

 

This evening Rog tried to justify a war crime carried out by the IDF on a UN observation post. As I have mentioned in previous posts, the fact that Hezbollah were near that post is also a war crime - and both sides have committed war crimes. However, there seems to be a refusal to understand that both sides have committed war crimes, and it is through the UN that these should be addressed. If you have any experience of the military, then perhaps you above all should have a better understanding of the consequences of breaching international law and conventions, and what that could mean to troops (British troops) on the ground e.g. we shoot prisoners, they shoot prisoners e.g. we torture prisoners, they torture prisoners. If we don't maintain and insist on international law and conventions - then surely the 'war on terror' is worthless – and we all effectively become terrorists.

 

This has nothing to do with people who have been in the forces being able to understand 'your point of view', it is about commonsense and solutions.

 

I have significant experience in the forces myself, and what I consider to be a good understanding of the middle east and it's history. This war is putting the region back twenty years, and if UN forces are placed in between the IDF and Hezbollah, as in the 80s, this is again likely to lead to many deaths amongst UN troops. If you really believe the IDF are doing their best to target Hezbollah then why have over 600 civilians been killed (a ratio of 10 civilians : 1 Hezbollah). Would you put your own son in between these fanatics first? - i.e. before trying to use the full power of a truly 'United Nations' with the power to introduce sanctions, penalties and try crimes etc.

 

Are you seriously telling me that following this path will lead to a more stable middle east than before Bush and Blair took action in the region over the past few years, and in this case have been so slow in seeking a ceasefire? Do you really think this is making Britain more secure, rather than a target for even more terrorist attacks?

 

IMHO, Bush and Blair will both be touring the lecture circuit in about two years, leaving an absolute mess that will take many, many years to put right. Until pressure is put on the US to respect the UN, and the UN has sufficient teeth to hold both sides to account, and enforce resolutions (on both sides), then this cycle of violence will simply continue, and probably get much worse.

 

From the reponses on this thread, I don't believe many people are actually bothering to read the posts anymore as their views seem so entrenched.

[LoneWolf]

Here is something to consider. The IDF fights in uniform. It goes for specific Hezbollah targets. It could bomb any Lebanese town or village flat if it wanted to, but it doesn't. It is mindful of civilian casualties. They are to be avoided if possible but are regrettable if not.

 

I suspect this may be falling on deaf ears PK. Anyone with experience of any of the armed services would or at least should agree with you. People without that experience may have a different view.

 

This has nothing to do with people who have been in the forces being able to understand 'your point of view', it is about commonsense and solutions.

 

Im not sure if you are wilfully misunderstanding the post you are supposed to be replying to ...

PK made the point Israel was exercising restraint given its capabilities. I supported this based on my own experience of the military. Nothing in either of those posts is in any way related to the rant you have posted in reply.

 

Are you seriously telling me that following this path will lead to a more stable middle east than before Bush and Blair took action in the region over the past few years, and in this case have been so slow in seeking a ceasefire? Do you really think this is making Britain more secure, rather than a target for even more terrorist attacks?

Not only am I not telling you any such thing but there is nothing in anything I have posted which would lead a reasonable person to imagine I have suggested any such thing. What on earth are you ranting about?

From the reponses on this thread, I don't believe many people are actually bothering to read the posts anymore as their views seem so entrenched.

If the cap fits Albert perhaps you should wear it! I find this a remarkable statement given your rant in this latest post!!

[Albert Tatlock]

PK made the point Israel was exercising restraint given its capabilities. I supported this based on my own experience of the military. Nothing in either of those posts is in any way related to the rant you have posted in reply.

Sorry, the question of whether restraint is being exercised has been answered. Israel and Hezbollah are not considered to be demonstrating sufficient restraint – demonstrated by the number of civilian casualties, the draft UN resolution (vetoed by the US and UK) as well as other political statements made around the world highlighting the term “disproportionate force”. In this context, this makes PK’s point and your response irrelevant, as the majority of world governments disagree. Provided international law and conventions are obeyed, the amount of ‘restraint’ is down to individual commanders on the ground. Outside of international law and conventions both commanders and individuals are responsible for their actions and risk committing war crimes for which they can be held accountable. The UN has identified numerous acts in this conflict (on both sides) that it considers to be war crimes under international law and conventions.

Are you seriously telling me that following this path will lead to a more stable middle east than before Bush and Blair took action in the region over the past few years, and in this case have been so slow in seeking a ceasefire? Do you really think this is making Britain more secure, rather than a target for even more terrorist attacks?

Not only am I not telling you any such thing but there is nothing in anything I have posted which would lead a reasonable person to imagine I have suggested any such thing. What on earth are you ranting about?

My post was not a rant, it summarised my position, in context with your last post as well as some of your previous posts/opinions, such as:

 

“Israel is the only state in the area which most of us in the West would recognise as a democracy” - when it is clearly not - Lebanon is recognised as a democracy by Britain (ask Tony Blair).

“Albert seems to be on a mission to debunk anything and everything Rog might say” - implying that you believe that I am simply targeting Rog - whatever he says - and not thinking about what I am posting. My post simply summarised my position - and how I hold both sides in equal contempt for their behaviour.

“In particular there needs to be a mechanism to prevent aid from falling into the hands of Hezbollah and worsening the situation”. You are falling into the classic trap that will not bring these people to the negotiation table, an example of why this should be left to diplomats and not soldiers.

 

It is very easy to take individual points out of context and call it a 'rant'. However, it is only those people that see this as a 'whole', and treat all of the parties involved with respect during negotiations, that will come anywhere near finding a solution. That will only be achieved when the US and the UK give back the UN its authority and its remit to pursue war criminals - not via the semantics, petty points of soldiering, or definitions of terrorism you are currently 'ranting' about.

 

IMHO of course.

[Fleur]

Thank you for that post Albert. I just wish I could be as eloquent.

[Tugger]

Incidentally I have never stated that the IDF doesn't have the right to defend itself, PK, you whiney little clown.

 

But they don't have the right to bombs dozens of kids for...well what? What military objective has been achieved by what happened in Qana? Unfortunately buffoons like PK have to keep trotting out the same line (just as Olmert does), when it's patently clear that this offensive has done nothing except kill innocents and act as a massive recruitment fair for Hezbollah. You'd think, when a policy is failing, it would be time to call it off (especially when the human cost is so high), but for Olmert and other idiots (you know who I mean) it's more about saving face now, than saving lives.

[The Old Git]

In one of the weekend papers, can't remember which one as we get about 5, there was quote from one of the Hezbollah chiefs in which he said something along the lines of -

 

We started preparing for this as soon as Israel pulled out six years ago. We started digging the tunnels and defences. It's a good job that we did because without us defending Lebanon it would have been overrun by the IDF

 

He seems to miss the obvious point that without them rocketing Israel and kidnapping soldiers there wouldn't have been an attack on Lebanon in the first place.

 

Also, did anyone see Panorama last night?

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/5209466.stm

 

An interesting programme on how charities like Interpal in the UK are sending funds to Hamas to further their aims and also fund orphanages where hate and the desire to be a maytry are fostered

[P.K.]

Incidentally I have never stated that the IDF doesn't have the right to defend itself, PK, you whiney little clown.

 

But they don't have the right to bombs dozens of kids for...well what? What military objective has been achieved by what happened in Qana? Unfortunately buffoons like PK have to keep trotting out the same line (just as Olmert does), when it's patently clear that this offensive has done nothing except kill innocents and act as a massive recruitment fair for Hezbollah. You'd think, when a policy is failing, it would be time to call it off (especially when the human cost is so high), but for Olmert and other idiots (you know who I mean) it's more about saving face now, than saving lives.

Keep the insults coming Tugger me boy. It says more about you than reasoned arguement ever will.

 

The Isreali aim is to take out as much of Hezbollah as possible and then get peace via an international force on the borders. Because the only thing Israel wants from Lebanon is to be left alone. The IDF have called off their strikes but Hezbollah are still firing their rockets at civilians.

 

History repeats itself at Qana, a great shame. I just hope some disgusting little Hezbollah murderers were killed as well because they started this particularly vicious round and seem determined to keep it going.

[Rog]

I make no apologies for copying here what I wrote elsewhere. It is relevant, especially the link – and the enclosed video on the web site, , at the end.

 

When I see a dead child, especially one that has been killed as a result of the violence of adults, all I see is a dead child.

 

I don’t see an arab child, an Israeli child, a moslem child, or any ‘kind’ of child, all that I see is a dead child and it cuts me up. It really does. What I see is a lost opportunity, a lost future, a lost happiness, a loss. Who can tell what that child may have grown up to be? So many things possible, so much opportunity lost.

 

All lost as a result of violence by adults.

 

That’s what I hate so much about the things that the arabs do. They use their own flesh and blood as weapons be it as homicide bombers and as human shields to try to make their enemies not want to attack out of simple humanity, or as deliberate cannon fodder that they can then exploit in their propaganda.

 

Such a thing could never happen in a Jewish family. The man would cut his own throat a thousand times over and more before he would let his own be in harms way and that is in part why the casualties in Israel have been less.

 

Not because hez-b’allah have not been targeting civilian targets, they have as a deliberate strategy, but because the people from Northern Israel have all moved or been moved out. Not because there were leaflets dropped warning them of an impending attack as was done on the ‘civilians’ in hez-b’allah occupied Southern Lebanon, but because common sense said that this was going to be ‘a big one’ and the faux argument used that the civilians couldn’t move out from the region is so much hogwash.

 

Main roads had been hit in order to restrict the passage of big trucks carrying replacement Syrian supplied and worse, but the minor roads that cars and small motor vehicles were perfectly passable.

 

The tragedy of the civilian casualties in this war is just that. A tragedy, but one brought about by the deliberate strategy of the hez-b’allah murderers.

 

Hez-b’allah. Party of god. Some party. Some god.

 

But what do you do?

 

If you are facing an enemy who will given the opportunity utterly destroy you and who has put his own in harms way, do you lay back and stay your hand and be destroyed? Because that is precisely what will happen if these people ever win. Or do you do your best to avoid hurting uninvolved civilians but accept that you MUST do what you must do in order to survive as a nation?

 

And let’s not child ourselves. If Israel were to loose a war with her enemies there would be no question of the people being forced back to the 1967 borders or even the 1947 borders, Israel would be utterly gone along with millions of people. Not displaced, destroyed. There would be utter bloody carnage in spite of anything the useless UN might try to do.

 

There is a guilty party in all this. It isn’t Israel, they are simply doing what must be done, it’s the filth who use their own flesh and blood as part of their war resources and worst of all as cannon fodder to make propaganda about.

 

Now check this out, especially the video..

 

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3283816,00.html

 

(It’s work friendly and not from a ‘difficult’ site.)

[Tugger]

"Such a thing could never happen in a Jewish family. The man would cut his own throat a thousand times over and more before he would let his own be in harms way "

 

Yep, that's right - those settlers and "hilltop youths" would never put their own in harm's way