OK, you've got an opinion? Let's see if it holds water., page 3
Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times


reply posted on 21-7-2006 @ 04:18 PM by Deus_Brandon
Originally posted by intrepid
First thing, I'm stating out front that I blame Hez(Syria, Iran) AND Israel for the suffering of the Lebenese people. The questions that arise:

Could the Lebenese army contain Hez? Appearently not.

The Lebanon army has not even tried ... to talk to the Hezz terrorist. NOTHING much less sent thier army against them if so ... The U N Would have came in and taken are of this problem long ago. What are you talking about ... ???

Could the average Achmed do anything without retaliation to him and his family by Hez? I seriously doubt it. Yes they could speak out and leave the country while this is happening. They could get in protected custody if they really wanted to come out and say something. But they don't because they are getting something out of this. So they take the criticism .. WELL WAIT YOU ARE NOT CRITIZIZING YOU ARE TELLING ME .. AWEE POOR PEOPLE GETTING POOR THINGS DONE TO THEM. LET SOMEONE TRY TO COME OVER HERE and take over Texas .... SHOOOOTTTTT ... WE WOUDL FIGHT FOR OURSELEVES .. if They can't fight for themsleves why the heck are we goign to try and help them out .. The same thing is going to happen again ...

Could Israel have done things differently to handle this situation? DAMN STRAIGHT!

I did a Mapquest search on Syria/Lebenon and there were unoccupied areas that could have been bombed, stopping those routes from rearming Hez. NOT areas that were inhabitted.

Bombing the airport? Hell the Israeli airforce could knock out any Syrian aircraft that was trying to give aid to Hez.

So, Israel has killed infrastructure that the civillians could use to get the hell out of the Dodge, leaving them at the wiles of the competing sides. I wonder WHY?

Thoughts?





reply posted on 21-7-2006 @ 04:24 PM by intrepid
Originally posted by bombers8

I did a Mapquest search on Syria/Lebenon and there were unoccupied areas that could have been bombed, stopping those routes from rearming Hez. NOT areas that were inhabitted.

What's the point of doing that? You may disrupt the re-stocking of armamnents from Syria and Iran, but you also disrupt the stocking of food and medicince and normal commerce.


Oh, and I'm sure that the destruction of roads and bridges in populated areas were MUCH more helpful getting food and medicine to the populous. C'mon man, use a little bit of logic.

Now, from my last post. The Israeli's could have cut the flow of support to Hez without a prolonged attack on Lebanon. Once the arms started to flow, not like they were doing much damage anyway, nothing could get through. Israel own the sky, now if you aren't intending to occupy, this gives them the option to control what goes where. Hez would be toothless in short order(long range).

Bombing the airport? Hell the Israeli airforce could knock out any Syrian aircraft that was trying to give aid to Hez.

My only guess is that they just wanted to make sure the airport was not used against them.


See my last reply, Israel controls the air, nothing lands or takes off without their letting it.

So, Israel has killed infrastructure that the civillians could use to get the hell out of the Dodge, leaving them at the wiles of the competing sides. I wonder WHY?

My guess is that it was a lesson to the Lebanese gov't that they should have not created the atmosphere that made it possible for Hezbollah to lob rockets into Israel. And it was also a warning to Syria and Iran that Israel was finally putting a stake in the ground that said, enough talk, you've gone too far.


Fine, now it's clear, this is just retribution.

I have heard mention here several times that Israel is creating the next generation of terrorists. Imo, falling for this line of thinking is to be the ultimate victim of terrorism. To be frightened into inaction because you may stir things up and create more terrorists is pure cowardice. They were never going to be your friend anyway. Giving them the green light to terrorize your citizens because you are afraid of the consequences is exactly what they want to happen.


And this is the thinking 20 years ago that created this situation today. Who will be the next generation? Well, you can start with the family of those killed by Israeli jets this week. Do you think they are going to be OK with what was RAMMED down their throats? Maybe they won't be cowards either.


reply posted on 21-7-2006 @ 04:33 PM by intrepid
Originally posted by hogtie

I did a Mapquest search on Syria/Lebenon and there were unoccupied areas that could have been bombed, stopping those routes from rearming Hez. NOT areas that were inhabitted.

The poblem with bombing unpopulated areas, is that destroying a road doesn't necessarily provide a choke point. If there are no natural or man made obstacles, then you just drive around the crater. Blow up a road at a bridge or near buildings, it is much harder to move through. Not healthy for the population, but for a military operation it is very practical.


Thus the "free airspace" that Israel enjoys(2000 successful sorties proves that). Jet patrols, strike helicopter patrols. They've got the tech. BTW, I'd wager it would have been less expensive to do this too.

Bombing the airport? Hell the Israeli airforce could knock out any Syrian aircraft that was trying to give aid to Hez.

If the goal is to stop material from coming in to Lebanon by air, this is the only way to do it without shooting down an airplane. No airport, no air traffic. What if Syria packs a bunch of civilians on a cargo plane full of ammo? If Israel shoots it down, its looked at as a massacre. If they don't, Hez has been resupplied. This way, Israel doesn't have to take such a politically dangerous risk.


I don't think Israel is that worried about international opinion. Besides, anything can be "spun".

But the majority of Hez will go with them. Hez just can't slug it out with Israel, especially without politically sensitive targets to tie Israels hands, such as hiding amongst civilians. Before you say that it hasn't stopped Israel so far, to have dropped as much ordinance and have so few civilian casualties is fairly remarkable. Also remember that the trend is to list all casualties as civilian. Its the trend in the ME, and also a legitimate propiganda weapon for them to use. I've accepted that's what they do and see its value. I don't understand why others don't see it at all. So most of Hez goes north, can't take their gear because Israel is watching from the skies, Israel goes in and desroys hardware left behind, or better yet finds new hardware supplied by Syria and Iran.

Good topic.


I hope you're right.

Good post btw.


reply posted on 21-7-2006 @ 04:45 PM by intrepid
Originally posted by missed_gear
Originally posted by intrepid
Rocket attacks and other such have been occuring for the last 6 years.

Links please? It has been a tired arguement, without substance.


There is a great deal of fault by the ‘press’ on this issue.
Concerning an AP article (one instance):

Perhaps most surprising is that the word "Katyusha" is not mentioned even once on the timeline. The thousands of Katyusha rockets fired at Israel from Lebanon, which for years terrified and traumatized residents of northern Israel forced to spend their days in bomb shelters, are certainly a key part of the Lebanon-Israel conflict and vital to understanding Israel's retaliations/invasions/attacks. CAMERA (Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in Ameriaca)


Good source for errors and corrections (which often go unread) and points to bias in media coverage through a fairly systematic/thorough approach. Such as:



Reading through some sites/organizations/bias that deal with media corrections, retractions and errors shows a differing light on many, many reports coming from the ME (and elsewhere).

mg


mg


Thank you for the link. You will note though, from YOUR source, that there was a six year hiatus of munitions being fired at Israel. That's what I've been saying all along.

Oct. 7, 2000: Hezbollah attacks an Israel military post and raids Israel, kidnapping three Israeli soldiers. The soldiers are later assumed dead. In mid-October, Hezbollah leader Nasrallah announces the group has also kidnapped an Israeli businessman. In 2004, Israel frees over 400 Arab prisoners in exchange for the business man and the bodies of the three soldiers.

March 1, 2001: The British government adds Hezbollah’s "military wing" to its list of outlawed terrorist organizations.

Dec. 11, 2002: Canada lists Hezbollah as a terrorist organization.

June 5, 2003: Australia lists Hezbollah’s "military wing" as a terrorist organization.

Sept. 2, 2004: United Nations Security Council Resolution 1559 calls for "the disbanding and disarmament of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias," a reference to Hezbollah.

December 2004: Both the United States and France ban Hezbollah’s satellite television network, Al Manar. A U.S. State Department spokesman notes the channel "preaches violence and hatred."

March 10, 2005: The European Parliament overwhelmingly passes a resolution stating: "Parliament considers that clear evidence exists of terrorist activities by Hezbollah. The (EU) Council should take all necessary steps to curtail them." The European Union nonetheless refrains from placing the group on its list of terror organizations.

July 12, 2006: Hezbollah attacks Israel with Katyushas, crosses the border and kidnaps two Israeli soldiers. Eight other soldiers are killed. Israel launches operation to rescue the soldiers and push Hezbollah from its border. Hezbollah attacks towns across northern Israel with rocket fire.



reply posted on 21-7-2006 @ 04:59 PM by bombers8
from intrepid
More to come in a bit, as I will show what SHOULD have been done. It goes with what another member posted.

Thanks a lot, intrepid...I just love being the class example!



Originally posted by intrepid
Oh, and I'm sure that the destruction of roads and bridges in populated areas were MUCH more helpful getting food and medicine to the populous. C'mon man, use a little bit of logic.

The infrastructure destruction was intentional. It was part of Israel's plan to extend a buffer zone into southern Lebanon.

The Israeli's could have cut the flow of support to Hez without a prolonged attack on Lebanon. Once the arms started to flow, not like they were doing much damage anyway, nothing could get through. Israel own the sky, now if you aren't intending to occupy, this gives them the option to control what goes where. Hez would be toothless in short order(long range).

To accomplish this would require that Israel occupy Lebanon, because otherwise, it is too easy to ship armaments among civilian traffic, air or otherwise. And I do not think that Israel intends to occupy Lebanon. They know how much they can get away with; destruction is one thing, occupation quite another.

Fine, now it's clear, this is just retribution.

People can still get out of Dodge; witness all the evacuees on their way to Cyprus. And there is auto traffic out of Lebanon, also. Yesterday was a story about some American students who got to Syria from Beirut via bus.

What is much more difficult now is the re-stocking of arms by Hezbollah.

And this is the thinking 20 years ago that created this situation today. Who will be the next generation? Well, you can start with the family of those killed by Israeli jets this week. Do you think they are going to be OK with what was RAMMED down their throats? Maybe they won't be cowards either.

What created today's situation was not cowering in a corner because of fear of upsetting the terrorists. It had nothing to do with that attitude.

I stand by my assessment: if you fail to act because you are afraid of reaction, then you are a true victim of terrorism. Hezbollah is not interested in peace or negotiation. They are only interested in driving Israel into the sea.


reply posted on 22-7-2006 @ 01:03 PM by missed_gear
Originally posted by intrepid
Thank you for the link. You will note though, from YOUR source, that there was a six year hiatus of munitions being fired at Israel. That's what I've been saying all along.


No…there was not a six year “hiatus”.

…and I explained the source’s purpose previously; what you chose was merely a “archived piece” from a larger article that explains how the AP’s time line is rife with bias.

The timeline you cite was the response from CAMERA that mirrored the biased AP’s timeline “for major events”. Also pointed out by my source that the AP time line of “major events” is by mo means exhaustive and shows Israel in an improper light…the timeline you cite was RE-written for that purpose only by CAMERA for comparison, (see Update July 17, 2006, article from the same home page, they are linked under a topic header) with the following important observations:

Ostensibly, the July 12 timeline provides historical context to the latest outbreak of hostilities. In fact, it distorts the history of conflict between the two sides, focusing almost exclusively on Israel's response to aggression from Lebanon while ignoring Palestinian and Lebanese assaults:
-[snip]-
Virtually every entry starts by naming Israel as the actor–"Israeli forces invade..."; "Israeli invades again..."; "the Israeli army moves into Beirut..."; "Israeli troops abduct Lebanese guerrilla..."; etc. By contrast, no aggressor is specified for the "attack on an Israeli bus" in 1978, nor the "guerrilla attacks" in 1996. Likewise, using the passive voice in the 1997 entry, AP avoids naming the killers of the Israeli soldiers.
-[snip]-
More recent Hezbollah attacks are ignored as well. The fatal July 2004 attack, and Hezbollah assaults on May 28, 2006, Feb. 3, 2006, Nov. 21, 2005 (to name a few) are not on the AP timeline.
Source Page

A copy of the AP timeline can be found through the link above as well so you can compare the ‘verbage’.

This is MY point:

The source I cite explains how prolific the bias in ME news is from many sources…and not just concerning Israel. Failure to recognize Hezbollah for 'minor'/other events ...such as the thwarted kidnapping attempt of IDF soldiers in Dec 2005, daily rocket attacks, suicide bombings, arming the West Bank, smuggling weapons, etc...all undermine the peace process while Israel is labled the agressor by the 'press'. The omissions about Hezbollah and focus on Israel is causing the confusion through poor reporting/distortion of fact (as pointed out many times above).

Sadly, people believe the front page and move on...

This same bias is reflected (regurgitated) in some of the many views on this board. But importantly to answer your original question, I’ll repeat that which also reflects as to the remainder of the above biased AP timeline you have chosen:

Perhaps most surprising is that the word "Katyusha" is not mentioned even once on the timeline. The thousands of Katyusha rockets fired at Israel from Lebanon, which for years terrified and traumatized residents of northern Israel forced to spend their days in bomb shelters, are certainly a key part of the Lebanon-Israel conflict and vital to understanding Israel's retaliations/invasions/attacks.


Here is an example of both a distortion and misrepresentation of events that occurred against Israel by Hezbollah in 2004.

mg
Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>    ^^TOP^^