It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Hezbollah Seize Israel Soldiers

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 04:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
Please direct me to the detention center, prisoner of war camp, or other official designated area for prisoners in Lebanon where these two soldiers are being held as "prisoners." After all, "prisoners" are held in prisons aren't they?

Your Semantics Sir. When a soldier is seized in a military action, he is a prisoner of war, isn't that right? He was not taken from his home in the middle of the night or captured on the airport going to hollidays. Apparently only Israel and United States are able to take prisoners of war - every other nation, when they do the same, is conduction acts of Terrorism, Kidnappings.

Double Standard Monkeys, not just to Confuse the General Public anymore...


Again you are wrong in your analogies. You seem to make an art out of twisting reality. When the US or Israel captures a militant it is with knowledge that he has crucial information, has been involved in terrorist activities or insurgency they therefore capture that person and bring them to interrogation, trial or if he is a heavyweight they liquidate him.
Hezbullah and the Palestinians captured soldiers in random without any knowledge of that soldiers actions, knowledge or affiliation. Hezbullah and Palesitnians engage in random act of violence as provocations.

Hezbullah had no justification to attack the IDF. Israel is not sittling in Lebanon and moreover Israel only reacts to Hezbullah provocations. Now the rules of the games have changed. Hezbullah is absorbing the accumulated rage of the IDF for the 6 years of provocation that included kidnapping and murder of soldiers, kidnap of Israeli citizens, cross border rocket attacks and the training, equipping and the support to Palesitnian terrorist organizations with the help of Syria and Iran.
If Syria and Iran join the fight they too will absorb that rage.

Iran is now watching their terror child (Hezbullah) beaten into a pulp and they have no idea what to do. Will they allow it? If they will, how will the Shiite militias in Iraq respond to Iran abandoning Hezbullah?

I just hope Nasralla is liquidated as well. He has it coming.




posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 08:28 AM
link   
Woah, woah, woah


Originally posted by JudahMaccabbi
if he is a heavyweight they liquidate him.

People actually talk like that? Im sorry but I couldnt bring myself to read the rest of your post after you used what I would class as the most vile euphamism ever penned.

Souljah is bang on in his terminology. The two soldiers that were captured by Hezbollah were captured inside Lebanon. Therefore they are PoW and it was infact Israel that committed the intial act of war by sending their troops into a sovereign nation. Hezbollah is a militia that was set up to fight the Israeli invasion in the 80's. When Israel continued to occupy southern Lebanon until 2000 they still had that valid and LEGAL purpose.

It is the likes of you, JudahMaccabbi, who distort terminology to paint your enemies into bad people. If you dont want Hezbollah to kill Israeli soldiers dont invade Lebanon. Simple. If you dont want Israeli civilians killed, dont kill Lebanese/Palestinian/Syrian civilians.

Trying to paint Hezbollah as terrorists when they're stopping Israel from invading their own nation is what we would expect from Israelis. Its no different to Russia or China refering to partisans and rebels as "enemies of the state", "murderous dogs" and "blood thirsty criminals".



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 08:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by subz

Trying to paint Hezbollah as terrorists when they're stopping Israel from invading their own nation


they are terrorists. they are not the lebanese military. the only reason they are allowed to exist in lebanon is because some members of the organization hold gov't seats (23 total). the amount of money and, therefore, influence, that hezbollah has is what keeps them from being disarmed, just like the other militia groups that ran amok in lebanon.

the lebanese are not happy with Israel's actions but they know that the offensive is a direct result of hezbollah's actions.


df1

posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Crakeur
they are terrorists. they are not the lebanese military. the only reason they are allowed to exist in lebanon is because some members of the organization hold gov't seats (23 total). the amount of money and, therefore, influence, that hezbollah has is what keeps them from being disarmed, just like the other militia groups that ran amok in lebanon.


Oh please, I can spew mindless rhetoric too...

they are terrorists. they are not the israeli military. the only reason they are allowed to exist in middle east is because some supporters hold UN veto power. the amount of money and, therefore, influence, that israel has is what keeps them from being disarmed, just like the other militia groups that ran amok in the middle east.
.



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
Your Semantics Sir. When a soldier is seized in a military action, he is a prisoner of war, isn't that right? He was not taken from his home in the middle of the night or captured on the airport going to hollidays. Apparently only Israel and United States are able to take prisoners of war - every other nation, when they do the same, is conduction acts of Terrorism, Kidnappings.

Double Standard Monkeys, not just to Confuse the General Public anymore...


Have these two "captured" soldiers been treated in accordance with the Geneva Conventions that you are so fond of espousing?

We will assume henceforth that your insistence that these soldiers are "prisoners of war" that they are to be treated in full accordance of the The Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols. Further, if these prisoners are treated in a manner not accepted by the Third convention that those that perpetrated said acts Hezbollah, and their puppet master Iran, are guilty of war crimes?

I'll buy into your semantics if you insist... But will you?

I think not.

Slippery Slope Monkeys, not just for international humanitarian law anymore...



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 01:13 PM
link   
Israel's forces are gov't forces. Hezbollah is a militia. Lebanon has it's own military.

Info on the rise and fall of Lebanese Militia Groups: en.wikipedia.org...


Hezbollah:
en.wikipedia.org...


Please direct me to some research that shows Israel's Military is not governement controlled but, in actuality, is a terrorist militia



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 01:32 PM
link   
I'm kind of puzzled by the fact that everyone is crying out about 2 soldiers being taken captive (screw "kidnapped") yet noone talks about the soldiers that during the initial attack that led to the captivity of the 2 soldiers and many civilians since then, have died.


df1

posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Crakeur
Please direct me to some research that shows Israel's Military is not governement controlled but, in actuality, is a terrorist militia

Irrelevant. Atrocities are atrocities whether under the control of a government or not. The words terrorism and terrorist have been degraded into nothing but "buzz words" used to defend the indefensible. Using your absurd definition, our founding fathers would have been labeled terrorist by king george.
.



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 01:51 PM
link   
if hezbollah rightfully represents the Lebanese military, why would we see this:


When asked by CNN what role Syria or Iran may have played in the current crisis, Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora said it would be "strange" for Hezbollah to have "done this alone."


Israel is recognized as a nation. Hezbollah is recognized as a terrorist group.

Let me quote the hezbollah link you probably didn't bother to read:


On September 2, 2004, the UN Security Council adopted UN Security Council Resolution 1559, coauthored by France and the United States. Echoing the Taif Agreement, the resolution "calls upon all remaining foreign forces to withdraw from Lebanon" and "for the disbanding and disarmament of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias." Lebanon is currently in violation of Resolution 1559 over its refusal to disband the military wing of Hezbollah. Syria was also in violation of the resolution until recently because of their military presence in Lebanon.



and more:



On October 7, 2004 the UN Secretary General Kofi Annan reported to the Security Council regarding the lack of compliance with Resolution 1559. Mr. Annan concluded his report by saying: "It is time, 14 years after the end of hostilities and four years after the Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon, for all parties concerned to set aside the remaining vestiges of the past. The withdrawal of foreign forces and the disbandment and disarmament of militias would, with finality, end that sad chapter of Lebanese history."


While I agree that the term terrorist is way over-used and is much more prevalent in today's reporting than in prior years, on October 8, 1999 (before the word became abused by the media), the US Gov't issued a Statement on Background Information on Foreign Terrorist Organizations. Guess who made the list?

www.state.gov...

Still waiting for you to find me something that indicates that Israel doesn't have a recognized government and is, actually, nothing more than a terrorist militia group. Al JAzeera links won't work.


df1

posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Crakeur
Israel is recognized as a nation.

Israel is a quasi US territory that is unable to even provide for its own defense without massive financial and military aide from the US. UN resolutions condeming israel for atrocities against humanity would have been passed long ago if not for the UN veto power of the US.


Israel's Flag Is Not Mine...
The answer to bigotry and anti-Semitism does not lie in fanatical Jewish nationalism. Of course the blowing-up of the King David Hotel, the hanging of the two British sergeants, the assassination of Bernadotte, the massacre of Arab women and children at Dier Yasin were all acts of tiny groups. But they have weakened the moral and spiritual stature of the world's oldest religion. Israel's terrorist Beigin and Hollywood's Ben Hecht, who encouraged such lawlessness by saying, "Every time you let go with your guns at the British betrayers of your homeland, the Jews of America make a little holiday in their hearts!" such people are doing the Jews more harm than any words which Goebbels spoke.


Clearly Israel was created by terrorists. These are the acts of a terrorist and since similar acts continue today then they are certainly terrorist also. Perhaps their terrorist acts are now sanctioned by the UN, but they are still terrorist acts.

Of course you could make a strong arguement that these isaeli's were freedom fighters, but then youd have accept that Hezbollah and Hamas are also freedom fighters. You cant have it both ways.



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by df1

Israel's Flag Is Not Mine...
Of course the blowing-up of the King David Hotel, the hanging of the two British sergeants, the assassination of Bernadotte, the massacre of Arab women and children at Dier Yasin were all acts of tiny groups..



he references "acts of tiny groups" and this shows that the Israeli army is a terrorst organization how?


Originally posted by df1
Clearly Israel was created by terrorists.



In 1947, following increasing levels of violence together with unsuccessful efforts to reconcile the Jewish and Arab populations, the British government decided to withdraw from the Palestine Mandate. The UN General Assembly approved the 1947 UN Partition Plan dividing the territory into two states, with the Jewish area consisting of roughly 55% of the land, and the Arab area roughly 45%. Jerusalem was planned to be an international region administered by the UN to avoid conflict over its status.

Immediately following the adoption of the Partition Plan by the UN General Assembly on November 29, 1947, David Ben-Gurion tentatively accepted the partition, while the Arab League rejected it. Attacks on civilians by both sides soon turned into widespread fighting between Arabs and Jews, this civil war being the first "phase" of the 1948 War of Independence.

On May 14, 1948, before the expiry of the British Mandate of Palestine at 5pm on May 15, 1948, the State of Israel was proclaimed.


so the UN are terrorists?


Originally posted by df1
Of course you could make a strong arguement that these isaeli's were freedom fighters, but then youd have accept that Hezbollah and Hamas are also freedom fighters. You cant have it both ways.


Hezbollah was allowed to remain armed as protection against the Israeli occupation. Israel withdrew in 2000. They are no longer fighting for their freedom. Now they are acting as an aggressor. They are getting what they were seeking. Sadly, the majority of Lebanon is stuck in the middle of Israel fighting Iran and Syria via Hezbollah.


df1

posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Crakeur
Hezbollah... no longer fighting for their freedom. Now they are acting as an aggressor.

Gimme a break...

Israel attacks lebanon and you say hezbollah is the aggressor because they dont passively sit on their hands & watch their family members die at the hands of israel.

I believe you are sincere and thats the scary part.



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 03:03 PM
link   
subz


Souljah is bang on in his terminology. The two soldiers that were captured by Hezbollah were captured inside Lebanon. Therefore they are PoW and it was infact Israel that committed the intial act of war by sending their troops into a sovereign nation.

Do you get your information from Al-menara (Hizbullah TV)? The Israeli soldiers were patroling the border on the Israeli side. This is Hezbullah aggression from start to finish.


Read the paper before you decide to rewrite history.



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 03:13 PM
link   
what juddah just said was what I was going to say in response to your accusation that Israel started the current fighting. Hezbollah guerillas crossed the border and attacked the Israeli patrols. Israel is attacking Lebanese sites for two reasons. One, the sites are used by Hezbollah members. Two, an attempt to force the Lebanese GOVERNMENT to do what the UN had wanted, which was to disband the militia groups.

Israel might be pushing too hard on the Lebanese but they continued to allow Hezbollah to operate from within the borders of Lebanon so they are somewhat responsible for this.


df1

posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 03:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Crakeur
Hezbollah guerillas crossed the border and attacked the Israeli patrols. Israel is attacking Lebanese...

I could swear a few posts ago you were insisting that hezbollah was a renegade militia having nothing to do with lebanon. And now you cite hezbollah as a justification for israel entering lebanon.

Amazing



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 03:39 PM
link   
Israel is demanding that UN Resolution 1559 be enforced by the Lebanese government:

Resolution 1559, passed in September 2004, called for the withdrawal of all foreign forces from Lebanon, the disbanding and disarmament of all militias, new presidential elections, and the extension of government authority throughout the country.

Both Syria and Israel withdrew their forces but Hezbollah keeps operating with autonomy.



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by df1I could swear a few posts ago you were insisting that hezbollah was a renegade militia having nothing to do with lebanon. And now you cite hezbollah as a justification for israel entering lebanon.



huh?

Hezbollah is a terrorist militia group that holds 23 seats in Lebanon's gov't. They were not disbanded, against UN orders, claiming that Hezbollah was protecting against Israeli occupation. Israel withdrew in 2000. Hezbollah was never disbanded. They are a "renegade" militia, funded by roughly 100 million dollars a year from Iran among other sources. They are not gov't run. Since the Lebanese gov't won't disband them, and since they operate out of Lebanon, Israel is bombing their locations and means of re-arming themselves.

This is what I have been posting from my first post. If you'd read the links and posts, perhaps you'd have seen this.



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 04:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by jtma508
Israel is demanding that UN Resolution 1559 be enforced by the Lebanese government:

Well if Israel Demands that UN Resolution 1559 to be enforeced, then I Demand, that the OTHER 65 UN RESOLUTIONS targetting Israel are to be Enforced:


UN Resolutions Against Israel, 1955-1992
  1. Resolution 106: "...‘condemns’ Israel for Gaza raid"
  2. Resolution 111: "...‘condemns’ Israel for raid on Syria that killed fifty-six people"
  3. Resolution 127: "...‘recommends’ Israel suspend its ‘no-man’s zone’ in Jerusalem"
  4. Resolution 162: "...‘urges’ Israel to comply with UN decisions"
  5. Resolution 171: "...determines flagrant violations’ by Israel in its attack on Syria"
  6. Resolution 228: "...‘censures’ Israel for its attack on Samu in the West Bank, then under Jordanian control"
  7. Resolution 237: "...‘urges’ Israel to allow return of new 1967 Palestinian refugees"
  8. Resolution 248: "...‘condemns’ Israel for its massive attack on Karameh in Jordan"
  9. Resolution 250: "...‘calls’ on Israel to refrain from holding military parade in Jerusalem"
  10. Resolution 251: "...‘deeply deplores’ Israeli military parade in Jerusalem in defiance of Resolution 250"
  11. Resolution 252: "...‘declares invalid’ Israel’s acts to unify Jerusalem as Jewish capital"
  12. Resolution 256: "...‘condemns’ Israeli raids on Jordan as ‘flagrant violation"
  13. Resolution 259: "...‘deplores’ Israel’s refusal to accept UN mission to probe occupation"
  14. Resolution 262: "...‘condemns’ Israel for attack on Beirut airport"
  15. Resolution 265: "...‘condemns’ Israel for air attacks for Salt in Jordan"
  16. Resolution 267: "...‘censures’ Israel for administrative acts to change the status of Jerusalem"
  17. Resolution 270: "...‘condemns’ Israel for air attacks on villages in southern Lebanon"
  18. Resolution 271: "...‘condemns’ Israel’s failure to obey UN resolutions on Jerusalem"
  19. Resolution 279: "...‘demands’ withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon"
  20. Resolution 280: "....‘condemns’ Israeli’s attacks against Lebanon"
  21. Resolution 285: "...‘demands’ immediate Israeli withdrawal form Lebanon"
  22. Resolution 298: "...‘deplores’ Israel’s changing of the status of Jerusalem"
  23. Resolution 313: "...‘demands’ that Israel stop attacks against Lebanon"
  24. Resolution 316: "...‘condemns’ Israel for repeated attacks on Lebanon"
  25. Resolution 317: "...‘deplores’ Israel’s refusal to release Arabs abducted in Lebanon"
  26. Resolution 332: "...‘condemns’ Israel’s repeated attacks against Lebanon"
  27. Resolution 337: "...‘condemns’ Israel for violating Lebanon’s sovereignty"
  28. Resolution 347: "...‘condemns’ Israeli attacks on Lebanon"
  29. Resolution 425: "...‘calls’ on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon"
  30. Resolution 427: "...‘calls’ on Israel to complete its withdrawal from Lebanon’
  31. Resolution 444: "...‘deplores’ Israel’s lack of cooperation with UN peacekeeping forces"
  32. Resolution 446: "...‘determines’ that Israeli settlements are a ‘serious obstruction’ to peace and calls on Israel to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention"
  33. Resolution 450: "...‘calls’ on Israel to stop attacking Lebanon"
  34. Resolution 452: "...‘calls’ on Israel to cease building settlements in occupied territories"
  35. Resolution 465: "...‘deplores’ Israel’s settlements and asks all member states not to assist Israel’s settlements program"
  36. Resolution 467: "...‘strongly deplores’ Israel’s military intervention in Lebanon"
  37. Resolution 468: "...‘calls’ on Israel to rescind illegal expulsions of two Palestinian mayors and a judge and to facilitate their return"
  38. Resolution 469: "...‘strongly deplores’ Israel’s failure to observe the council’s order not to deport Palestinians"
  39. Resolution 471: "...‘expresses deep concern’ at Israel’s failure to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention"
  40. Resolution 476: "...‘reiterates’ that Israel’s claims to Jerusalem are ‘null and void’
  41. Resolution 478: "...‘censures (Israel) in the strongest terms’ for its claim to Jerusalem in its ‘Basic Law’
  42. Resolution 484: "...‘declares it imperative’ that Israel re-admit two deported Palestinian mayors"
  43. Resolution 487: "...‘strongly condemns’ Israel for its attack on Iraq’s nuclear facility"
  44. Resolution 497: "...‘decides’ that Israel’s annexation of Syria’s Golan Heights is ‘null and void’ and demands that Israel rescind its decision forthwith"
  45. Resolution 498: "...‘calls’ on Israel to withdraw from Lebanon"
  46. Resolution 501: "...‘calls’ on Israel to stop attacks against Lebanon and withdraw its troops"
  47. Resolution 509: "...‘demands’ that Israel withdraw its forces forthwith and unconditionally from Lebanon"
  48. Resolution 515: "...‘demands’ that Israel lift its siege of Beirut and allow food supplies to be brought in"
  49. Resolution 517: "...‘censures’ Israel for failing to obey UN resolutions and demands that Israel withdraw its forces from Lebanon"
  50. Resolution 518: "...‘demands’ that Israel cooperate fully with UN forces in Lebanon"
  51. Resolution 520: "...‘condemns’ Israel’s attack into West Beirut"
  52. Resolution 573: "...‘condemns’ Israel ‘vigorously’ for bombing Tunisia in attack on PLO headquarters
  53. Resolution 587: "...‘takes note’ of previous calls on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon and urges all parties to withdraw"
  54. Resolution 592: "...‘strongly deplores’ the killing of Palestinian students at Bir Zeit University by Israeli troops"
  55. Resolution 605: "...‘strongly deplores’ Israel’s policies and practices denying the human rights of Palestinians
  56. Resolution 607: "...‘calls’ on Israel not to deport Palestinians and strongly requests it to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention
  57. Resolution 608: "...‘deeply regrets’ that Israel has defied the United Nations and deported Palestinian civilians"
  58. Resolution 636: "...‘deeply regrets’ Israeli deportation of Palestinian civilians
  59. Resolution 641: "...‘deplores’ Israel’s continuing deportation of Palestinians
  60. Resolution 672: "...‘condemns’ Israel for violence against Palestinians at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount
  61. Resolution 673: "...‘deplores’ Israel’s refusal to cooperate with the United Nations
  62. Resolution 681: "...‘deplores’ Israel’s resumption of the deportation of Palestinians
  63. Resolution 694: "...‘deplores’ Israel’s deportation of Palestinians and calls on it to ensure their safe and immediate return
  64. Resolution 726: "...‘strongly condemns’ Israel’s deportation of Palestinians
  65. Resolution 799: "...‘strongly condemns’ Israel’s deportation of 413 Palestinians and calls for their immediate return.

But I guess that Will Happen when the Hell Freezes Over...




[edit on 14/7/06 by Souljah]



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 04:30 PM
link   
Souljah, the majority of those resolutions state that the UN "deplores" or "condemns" Israel for some act or inaction. You want to enforce the collective "feelings" of the UN?
Please explain how you wish to enforce Resolution 641: "...‘deplores’ Israel’s continuing deportation of Palestinians?

It should also be pointed out that some of the resolutions that actually involve actions have been followed. Israel did withdraw from Lebanon. Until Hezbollah decided it was ok to cross into Israel and attack the soldiers and take a few hostage.



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 04:37 PM
link   
Well Crakeur, no one said he actually had to read the resolutions... just create an impressive list. As an example, in 2000, Israel withdrew from southern Lebanon in accordance with UN Security Council Resolution 425 from 1978. Israel's line of withdrawal (the blue line) was recognized by the UN Security Council as a full withdrawal, and described in UN Security Council Resolutions 1310 and 1337.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join