I think he's got ya there Stu ole buddy. You're gonna have to come strong. =)

Not at all PoP, I've had worse..

The info is in that same link I posted about the EU.

Hmmm... I am willing to concede that point, but the UK and Aus make the distinction between the Military wing and the rest of the group, which the rest do not.

You cant be serious. Rocket attacks aimed at civilians NOT terrorist attacks? Economic reasons???? So by your logic the WTC 9/11 attacks were not terrorist attacks but purely economical as well then, since it caused great financial loss to America. Thats a dangerous line your toeing there mate.

PoP tried that one once... the difference being that Hezbollah fired the rockets in response to Israeli air raids on Apartment blocks, schools, hospitals, roads, bridges, the port, the Airport......need I go on?

Both were shelling civilian targets and both were committing WAR CRIMES in a time of war...not terrorist attacks. I've never maintained that I support Hezbollah over the Israelis, regardless what my position on Israel itself. Both are in the wrong with their tactics here.

9/11, or 11/9 as I prefer to call it, was an (mostly) unprovoked attack by a clandestine terrorist cell against a civilian target. That is a terrorist attack.

Israel is TARGETING KEY HEZBOLLAH TARGETS. They are not bombing indiscriminately. Read the article written by a the Lebanese journalist that I posted, where he points out that Israel have been very precise and careful with their strikes.

THey are not just shooting rockets recklessly like Hezbollah, they are attacking targets that are either: Hezbollah missile launching sites, or Hezbollah strongholds.

You see, the problem herein lies with the designation Israel has given Hezbollah (entirely), see the first point above. Now, a "hezbollah stronghold", does that include hezbollah schools, hospitals etc? Apparently. I know Israel has been very precise. They have very precisely bombed the crap out of the entire of Lebanon's civilian infrastructure, which in no way can be called a "hezbollah stronghold".

Look past the labelling and see what they have actually bombed. Both sides would have been better off concentrating their fire at each other rather than at each others innocents.

As far as the UN / UNHCR goes, they are a worthless organisation that cant even organise a peacekeeping force to get in there and sorth this mess out.

I wish people would think about what they post before running their mouths off. I can understand the frustration with the UN, but it is OUR Governments that are in the UN. It is OUR Governments who do the descision making, it is OUR Governments that ntake 3 weeks to agree on a wishy-wasy resolution.

Remember that.

Hmmm... I am willing to concede that point, but the UK and Aus make the distinction between the Military wing and the rest of the group, which the rest do not.

Which I agree with - the political wing should not be recognized as terrorists because they were elected by the people.

Both were shelling civilian targets and both were committing WAR CRIMES in a time of war...not terrorist attacks. I've never maintained that I support Hezbollah over the Israelis, regardless what my position on Israel itself. Both are in the wrong with their tactics here.

A war is generally a conflict between the armed forces of two soveriegn nations. Not attacks by a non state terrorist organisation directed at the armed forces of a RECOGNIZED sovereign state.

And it was the kidnapping of IDF personall that started this war, not Israel shelling Hezbollah targets. I might also point out that the kidnapping was unprovoked.

You see, the problem herein lies with the designation Israel has given Hezbollah (entirely), see the first point above. Now, a "hezbollah stronghold", does that include hezbollah schools, hospitals etc? Apparently. I know Israel has been very precise. They have very precisely bombed the crap out of the entire of Lebanon's civilian infrastructure, which in no way can be called a "hezbollah stronghold".

What designation then, would you give a group like Hezbollah? They are a non state organisation who operate as the militant wing of a minor political party. They are certainly not resistance fighters, as they are already a part of their government!

I wish people would think about what they post before running their mouths off. I can understand the frustration with the UN, but it is OUR Governments that are in the UN. It is OUR Governments who do the descision making, it is OUR Governments that ntake 3 weeks to agree on a wishy-wasy resolution.
Remember that.

Dont worry I thought about that comment. I know that our Governments are in the UN. That doesnt mean that they arent useless and ineffective in dealing with situations such as these. No one takes the UN seriously these days - especially groups like the IDF and Hezbollah.


[edit on 15-8-2006 by Ezekiel]

I would call Hezbollah a Geurilla group, not terrorists. But I can't be arsed to debate that point on the 435th thread I have said it. For my stance, check out the other threads. Sorry, i am too tired after a 12 hr night shift to dig up the links for you. I might do that tonight if your lucky

As for who started what.... were the IDF soldiers were taken is a contented point. Western media says Israel where as the rest of the worlds media says lebanon. Also, one must remember that the IDF routinely penetrated Lebanon by air and land with it's forces prior to this episode and does so to other soveriegn states.

A War does not have to take place between two soveriegn states. What else would a war be called if it wasn't between two states? A nasty brawl with lots of pushing a shoving?

Originally posted by stumason
I would call Hezbollah a Geurilla group, not terrorists. But I can't be arsed to debate that point on the 435th thread I have said it. For my stance, check out the other threads. Sorry, i am too tired after a 12 hr night shift to dig up the links for you. I might do that tonight if your lucky

Hehe thats ok mate - I dont think thats a debate I feel up to at the moment anyway.

A War does not have to take place between two soveriegn states. What else would a war be called if it wasn't between two states? A nasty brawl with lots of pushing a shoving?

I know what you mean, I probably didnt explain myself well enough.

War between two Sovereign nations is one thing - war between a group of guerillas/terrorists and a sovereign nation from within the borders of another sovereign nation is something completely different. This kind of war cannot be labeled or dealt with in the same way as a conventional war, nor can the actions of either group be compared to those of a conventional war.

Good one Dark I was just about to post the same link. It doesn't look so spontaneous now does it?

This just goes to show how manipulative and forward thinking the Israelis and USA are with such 'events' however this has clearly back fired on them as Hizbollah have stood their ground and while not necessarily being the victory they are claiming it's been fought to a draw.

What will they think of next?

Originally posted by kickoutthejams
Good one Dark I was just about to post the same link. It doesn't look so spontaneous now does it?

This just goes to show how manipulative and forward thinking the Israelis and USA are with such 'events' however this has clearly back fired on them as Hizbollah have stood their ground and while not necessarily being the victory they are claiming it's been fought to a draw.

What will they think of next?

Well next they are thinking of attacking Iran, its so obvious to everyone that this is what they are planning. It is all Bush and Blair have talked about since the crisis in Lebanon started. Iran did it.... Its Iran's fault... Iran helped them blah blah blah. They have one focus in mind and that is to attack Iran, it wouldnt surprise me if we have another large terror attack soon which will get blamed on Iran and then they will have all the justification they need...