From Israel to Lebanon - Page 2

EmptyneSs · 08-02-2006, 02:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Brewer

Is it okay to target soldiers while you yourself are operating in someone else's country, from someone else's country you've already been told to leave, operating against UN Resolutions, violating buffer zones?

a soldiers job is to fight. when you become a soldier, you take on the risk of being killed or attacked. im not condoning it as you are trying to imply, im just saying thats the fact, so why all the uproar? hezbollah targeted the military, not civilians.

btw, im not sure we can lump hezbollah into the same group as terrorists like al quaeda. we all know there were thousands of americans living peacefully in hezbollah territory and they werent targeted by hezbollah. hezbollah runs lebanon, they could have snatched american civilians easily if they had wanted to, but they didnt. why is that? al queda snatches up all kinds of people, especially westerners and films their beheadings and killings everyday, are they really the same as hezbollah guerillas fighting israeli troops invading their country? im not sure if all of hezbollah are terrorists, many of them are legitimate nationalists fighting for their country, not the same mindless maniacs who are going on rampages through iraq.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Brewer

And while we're on the subject, did you just suggest that Hezbollah doesn't target civilians? Did you just make the completely assinine suggestion that the thousands of rockets being fired direstly at civilian populated cities is somehow worse than the Israelis going after the Hezbollah fighters who kidnapped their troops?

i said they didnt target civilians in the encounter that treelizard was describing. the rockets being fired at israelis civilians came after israel started its bombing campaign(of civilian areas), not before.

and no i didnt make the asanine suggestion that rockets being fired at israel is worse than israel going after hezbollah fighters. but i will make the suggestion that israels policy of firing missiles into crowded urban areas on a daily basis, which kills civilians daily is just as bad as what hezbollah is doing. israel has rained down missles on the palestinians for years in its targeted assassination policy, despite the many innocent casualties that are produced from each strike.

treelizard · 08-02-2006, 03:21 AM

Unprovoked border attacks are NOT "fair game" and if you don't see anything barbaric about cutting off body parts for fun, then I don't know what else to say.

There is a difference between specifically targetting civilians (like the hundreds of Hezbollah missiles) and air strikes that are not intended to kill civilians. I'd say that dropping hundreds of leaflets calling on civilians to stay away from certain areas to avoid getting caught up in fighting would prove that Israel is not targetting civilians.

treelizard · 08-02-2006, 04:19 AM

From thereligionofpeace.com:

Current: Let’s put the current situation in the Middle East into a practical analogy that anyone can understand (even if they choose not to):

Suppose that your house and my house are right next to each other. I make the choice to allow a sniper to operate on the upper floor of mine, from my children’s bedroom, in fact. The sniper fires indiscriminately into your house while I sit downstairs reading my newspaper.

Eventually your family members start getting killed by the sniper operating from my upstairs bedroom, yet I ignore your pleas to stop the shooting. You then defend your own family by firing back in an effort to take out the sniper, even though it means that my children might be killed in the crossfire, despite your best efforts to avoid hitting them.

As the bullets fly, the sniper holds my young ones up in front of him as a personal shield.

Upon hearing that I am losing offspring in the gun battle, I rush upstairs and thank the sniper for his service to my family.

Our civic community ignores the context of your actions and adamantly condemns them, while exhibiting very little concern for my sniper or my decision to allow him to kill your family members and precipitate the violence.

Too bizarre to be true? Nope, this is reality. Islamic militants operate freely out of Lebanon and Gaza, killing and kidnapping Israelis, while hiding behind civilians - even launching rockets next to apartment buildings, knowing that retaliatory fire may doom the innocent lives inside. Yet, the international community serves only to condemn Israel for defending itself against these attacks.

Want the violence to stop? Then forget your prejudices and preconceptions. Start condemning the parties that are directly responsible for the hostilities rather than bolstering their resolve.

reference:

http://www.theage.com.au/news/World/...198039135.html

EmptyneSs · 08-02-2006, 04:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by treelizard

Unprovoked border attacks are NOT "fair game" and if you don't see anything barbaric about cutting off body parts for fun, then I don't know what else to say.

it is barbaric. but dropping thousands of 1000 lb bombs on civilian areas is also barbaric in some peoples eyes dont you think? this specific attack was to avenge the little girl whos entire family was massacred by israeli shells while they were at a picnic at a beach. they also wanted to capture soldiers to trade for prisoners of war. palistinians are killed everyday by israel, so why is it such a shock that they want revenge or that some take military action?

firing missles from choppers into refugee camps on a daily basis and killing innocents daily might also be considered by some to be a provocation dont you think?

Quote:

Originally Posted by treelizard

There is a difference between specifically targetting civilians (like the hundreds of Hezbollah missiles) and air strikes that are not intended to kill civilians.

wait, im not so sure there is a difference in what they are doing right now. israel started a bombing campaign of lebanon, and killed hundreds of civilians wether they intended to or not. so hezbollah did the same, began a bombing campaing of israel to retaliate except hezbollah didnt have planes they had older rockets and missles. the only difference is that israel has now killed over 500 innocents, way more than hezbollah has in this conflict.

Quote:

Originally Posted by treelizard

I'd say that dropping hundreds of leaflets calling on civilians to stay away from certain areas to avoid getting caught up in fighting would prove that Israel is not targetting civilians.

israel was also continually warned that rockets will be fired at its cities if it continued with its bombing campaign but they pressed for war anyway. hezbollah rockets didnt start falling on israel until after israeli bombs hit lebanon.

im trying to look at both sides without taking a side. mike b says i support terrorists because i dont share his view ? wtf?

EmptyneSs · 08-02-2006, 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Brewer

I didn't say you support terrorists because you don't share my view. I said that if you support Hezbollah, you support terrorists - because that's exactly what they are. They are a movement founded on the eradication of another people. They are responsioble for more terrorist attacks than al-Qaeda, so maybe you're right. We shouldn't lump them in with al-Qaeda, because they're worse. They are not "soldiers." They are invaders in Lebanon, operating there against Lebanese law and against UN Resolution 1559. They were told to get out years ago, but never did. And no one forced them to, even though they were sitting on the Israeli border preparing it for a war with Israel - planning it out and positioning themselves right where they are to do exactly what they are doing, for six straight years. If you don't support Hezbollah, then you have no reason to think I lumped you in with terrorist supporters. But if you do support them, you do in fact support terrorists. If you support Hezbollah, you support an illegitimate terrorist group that is operating illegally on Lebanese soil for the express purpose of wiping out the Jewish people. Those are simply facts. You can get upset about them, but it doesn't change the fact that they are true.

not all people in hezbollah are terrorists. many are lebanese nationalists.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Brewer

And by the way, there is a HUGE difference in what's happening. Israel is attacking rocket and missile sites that HEzbollah is surrounding with Lebanese people specifically so that Lebanese civilians will be killed. What do they care? It's Lebanese, not Palestinians. Hezbollah thinks nothing of surrounding their rocket launchers with Lebanese civilians, hiding their operations in Lebanese homes and schools. Hezbollah wants to force Israel to attack civilians, and they imbed their offensive weapons among foreigners so that Israel has only two choices - attack, or allow them to continue bombarding from these areas. Hezbollah, on the other hand, firesright into the cities. They aren't attacking Israeli military targets that just happen to be in the city, either. They are trying to kill Jews wherever they can find them.

you can say what israel doing is better or different, the fact remains they have killed more civilians now than hezbollah has, wether they wanted to or not.

treelizard · 08-02-2006, 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EmptyneSs

not all people in hezbollah are terrorists. many are lebanese nationalists.

Dude, have you actually read Hezbollah's charter?

Here's an excerpt:

"The Necessity for the Destruction of Israel
We see in Israel the vanguard of the United States in our Islamic world. It is the hated enemy that must be fought until the hated ones get what they deserve. This enemy is the greatest danger to our future generations and to the destiny of our lands, particularly as it glorifies the ideas of settlement and expansion, initiated in Palestine, and yearning outward to the extension of the Great Israel, from the Euphrates to the Nile.

Our primary assumption in our fight against Israel states that the Zionist entity is aggressive from its inception, and built on lands wrested from their owners, at the expense of the rights of the Muslim people. Therefore our struggle will end only when this entity is obliterated. We recognize no treaty with it, no cease fire, and no peace agreements, whether separate or consolidated."

EmptyneSs · 08-02-2006, 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by treelizard

Dude, have you actually read Hezbollah's charter?

Here's an excerpt:

"The Necessity for the Destruction of Israel
We see in Israel the vanguard of the United States in our Islamic world. It is the hated enemy that must be fought until the hated ones get what they deserve. This enemy is the greatest danger to our future generations and to the destiny of our lands, particularly as it glorifies the ideas of settlement and expansion, initiated in Palestine, and yearning outward to the extension of the Great Israel, from the Euphrates to the Nile.

Our primary assumption in our fight against Israel states that the Zionist entity is aggressive from its inception, and built on lands wrested from their owners, at the expense of the rights of the Muslim people. Therefore our struggle will end only when this entity is obliterated. We recognize no treaty with it, no cease fire, and no peace agreements, whether separate or consolidated."

israel occupied their land for over 20 years, and killed many people during that time. you dont think they gonna be a bit mad about that? no country in the world is going to be cool with invaders occupying their land, including america. if a foreign army occupied your neighborhood for over 20 years and killed many of the people in your community treelizard, i think you would be kinda mad at the occupying army too wouldnt you? surely you can see why they are angry?

in fact, hezbollah didnt even exist until israel invaded lebanon in the 80's. hezbollah was created to resist israels occupation of lebanon. hezbollah is not al queda. as i mentioned, there have been tens of thousands of american civilians living in lebanon among hezbollah members for many years in peace and they werent snatched or targeted by hezbollah at all. hezbollah runs lebanon, if they truly are a terrorist organization on par with al queda how come they never attacked any of our civilians, despite knowing full well how much the usa give weapons and support to israel?

those fcked up images we see of those people chanting death to america and israel, burning flags, blowing shit up, yeah its pretty fcked up but the fact is we help to create a lot of it.

Tim McFatridge · 08-11-2006, 04:42 PM

Sorry guys I had to jump in here on this one. I have to agree with Mike and treelizard on this one guys. Uke even after you tried to explain your position on the matter it is still very clear that you are not a supporter of Israel which is fine. Everyone is entitled to their own personal opinion. However, since you quoted the Bible and the name Israel I think it is only fair that we take a closer look at what the Bible has to say about the Israelites. Genesis 32: 24-28 says: "So Jacob was left alone, and a man wrestled with him till daybreak. When the man saw that he could not overpower him, he touched the socket of Jacob's hip so that his hip was wrenched as he wrestled with the man. The man said, "let me go, for it is daybreak." But Jacob replied, "I will not let you go unless you bless me." The man asked him, "What is your name?" "Jacob," he answered. Then the man said, "Your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel, because you have struggled with God and with men and have overcome."
When God gave Jacob the name Israel he was giving Jacob a new life...a new start if you will. If you read the versus before you will also see that Jacob lived in the land of his father Abraham which was the land of Canaan. Abraham moved to Canaan after Sodom and Gamorah was destroyed by God. Jacob had 12 sons and one of them was Joseph. Joseph became the second in command in all of Egypt. When Egypt had the famine that lasted 7 years Joseph's brothers and his father Jacob(Israel) moved from Canaan to Goshen which was in Egypt to try and escape the famine that was going on across the country. Joseph went to Pharoah and told hin that his father and brothers along with all the flocks and herds and everything they own have come to Egypt. Pharoah told Joseph "to settle his father and his brothers in the best part of the land. Let them live in Goshen. And if you know of any among them with special ability, put them in charge of my own livestock." (Genesis 47: 6)
Later in Exodus 1:6-15 we read about the Israelites being oppressed by the new Pharoah. "Now Joseph and all his brothers and all that generation died, but the Israelites were fruitful and multiplied greatly and became exceedingly numerous, so that the land was filled with them. Then a new king, who did not know about Joseph, came to power in Egypt. Look, he said to his people, the Israelites have become much too numerous for us. Come, we must deal with shrewdly with them or they will become even more numerous and if war breaks out, will join our enemies, fight against us and leave the country.
If you read on you see that Pharoah put slave masters over them and forced them to do hard labor. But the more they were oppressed the more they multiplied and spread so the Egyptians came to dread the Israelites. Then you have Pharoah give an order to kill all the male children and let all the girls live. Now skip over to Numbers 13:1-3 and you will read: "The LORD said to Moses, Send some men to explore the land of Canaan, which I am giving to the Israelites." Sorry I did not mean to turn this into a bible study class but did feel that is was necessary to point all this out since Uke and Emptyness seem to think that Israel does not have any rights to the land they inhabit today. The battle that is going on in the Middle East has been going since the Israelites left Egypt and settled in Canaan. In order to understand it though you have to look at it from a religious perspective. All the countries surrounding Israel have always been enemies of Israel and enemies of anyone who calls them self an ally of Israel. The good news for us is that God promises to bless those who bless Israel and to curse those who curse Israel. If you disagree with the above information thats fine but understand...you are not disagreeing with me but with God. Also Uke you mentioned the media and how they show Israel as not doing anything wrong...I want to know what news channel you have been watching...because everything I see in the media is reporting on Israel being the ones to blame and not saying anything at all about Hezbolla doing anything wrong. I keep hearing and seeing reports from Beiruit and how so many women and children have been killed in the bombings but rarely hear anything about the innocent people killed in Israel when Hezbollah fires 90+ missiles into Israel. Again sorry to turn it into a bible study class but you really do have to go all the way back to those days to see that the Israelites have been run out of every land they inhabit. Oh sorry one more point. There may not have been a country called Israel but the land the Israelites inhabited has always been known as the Land of the Israelites.

**traveller** · 08-12-2006, 07:10 PM

Not doubt everyone knows where I stand on this issue from previous post.
I am on nobodies side in this forum.
I have my opinion and if you agree with me great, if you don't great.
I have pos repped most of you for one post or another.

If the issues are about religious claims to the land as Hizbollah quotes: they are unfounded. The muslim culture did not exist when the jews were enslaved in egypt. That is a fact. Sorry, but it is. So the jews have the religious seniority if you will. Unless somebody knows of one of these countries who still have a national religion based upon the sun god or the divinity of the pharoahs, or the greek or roman gods, etc.
There has always been a jewish presence in what we call the middle east. Many Isreali jews today are not the descendants of those original jews.
Many are.
Many iranians are descendants of the persians. Many are not.
The macedonians and greeks once ruled what we now consider the middle east, as did the romans. Many iraqi, palestinian, iranian, etc can trace their roots at least partly back to these ancestors. Meaning some of them might be WESTERNERS should you beleive some people's logic.
The current lines of division among middle eastern states are not what they were pre-WWII (bravo whoever pointed that out).
Here is my point, whatever side you are, you cannot make the argument of historical or ancestral national lines and what property once belonged to which group. Arguments from any of the countries in that region which used that as justification for their actions are just reaching for an excuse.
Religion is a primary factor there, but not "the" only factor in the middle east.
It it were I would need someone to explain to me the Iran-Iraq War, Iraqs invasion of Kuwait, etc.
It is and always will be a about power. Leaders wishing for power use religion or nationalism to gather followers plain and simple. That is where it started. It may have taken on a nationalist or relgious furvor since, but it all started with a quest for power period.

All that being said, let me get to what I really want to know. I think I can guess at most of your stances on all the following, but would everyone just answer the following with yes or no?

Is Hizbollah justified in firing missiles at civilians?
Is Israel justified attacking Hizbollah targets?
Is Hizbollah a terrorrist organization?
Is Israel a terrorist country?
Do you like chocolate ice cream?

**traveller** · 08-12-2006, 07:37 PM

I'll answer to get us started:

No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes

A few more questions if you feel inclined. It may help everyone see where someone's point of view is coming from.

If you ae an American have you ever left the country (Canada and Mexico don't count)?
Have you been to the Middle East?
Have you been to Southwest Asia?
Have you been to southeast asia?
Have you been to South America?
Have you been to Europe?
Have you been to Africa?
And just for fun:
Did you vote republican or democrat in the last 3 pres elections?

**traveller** · 08-13-2006, 03:56 PM

My answers to my 2nd set of Qs
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Republican

Yes, I know some of what many refer to as southwest asia overlaps with what we call the middle east, and parts of africa as well depending on who you talk to.

EmptyneSs · 08-14-2006, 01:58 AM

do you guys think this new cease fire deal struck today is actually gonna have any effect?

and is this a defeat for isreal? because if the war does end, the fact remains that they were not able to stop rockets from hitting israel, let alone defeating hezbollah as an organization.

and if this is a defeat for israel, will it only embolden the etremist movements around the globe?? what about hezbollah? is their standing stronger now?

israeli tanks have been rendered obsolete now too, as their most advanced armor has been repeatedly defeated by guerilla weaponry.

history repeats itself, as a conventional army cannot defeat guerillas on their own terrain that have the popular support of their people. this is what happens when you dont know your enemy.

**traveller** · 08-14-2006, 09:51 AM

Of course it will have an effect -- what the effect will be is the question. I wouldn't call it a defeat for Israel, because I don't believe they are done. This could just be tactical maneuvering on the part of Israel, or it could be something they have had in mind for quite some time.
Israel is actually in a position now to say "see we stopped and "H" continues," should "H" do anything else.
If any one else gets emboldened, Israel will say they are justified in attacking at full force instead of trying to only eliminate the attacker itself.
If "H" keeps the peace they strengthen their position with some, and weaken it with others. Other extremist groups will see them as a weak link in an overall plan. Some major nation players may see this as a positive and be swayed a bit more twoard the "H" cause if they maintain the cease fire.
Don't buy that the tanks are obsolete. The way they are being used is obsolete. If Israel chose to actually use a true combined force campaign with the proper support elements, you would see just how deadly those tanks are. Even if Israel just quit showing restraint and used a full armored assault the results would have be different and you would see less vulnerability in the "Israel" armored arsenal.
It is hard to defeat guerrillas tactics, but it is even harder to fight within rules of engagement when your enemy has none.
Every one expects "H" to fight the way they are fighting and shows little criticism. Every one expects a powerful nation like Israel to show restraint, keep the collateral damage as minimal as possible, and have concern for the civilian casualties they cause.
Look at the U.S. situation. Insurgents in Iraq have killed more civilians than the U.S. has, and yet when the U.S. kills one civilian it is considered an attrocity.
In this battle "H" seems to be the victor.
Israel has been at this a long time however and still stands as a Nation in the midst of it's enemies. I doubt they consider the war to be ended.

Tim McFatridge · 08-14-2006, 10:59 AM

I would not consider this a loss for Israel either. Israel is smart and I think they are fully aware of what they are doing. I think like traveller said this is part of their plan so Israel can show the world that they stopped. I also think Hezbollah will once again attack Israel within the next few days then you see Israel answer with full force. History does repeat itself if we do not learn from our past. Go back and look at the Israeli 6 day war...that was some serious butt kicking on Israel parts. How many enemies did they defeat? and how many bases did they destroy? and how many fronts were they fighting on all at once? and at the end of six days Israel was standing strong and the enemy had no more fighter jets, no more functional bases. The fighting over there will never stop regardless of what the world does because they are all brought up to hate one another because of religious beliefs. It makes me really thankful to be living in a country where I can sleep in peace at night and even thankful that I am able to buy gas for what I can. Also makes me really thankful for our men and women who serve this country proudly.

**traveller** · 08-14-2006, 02:13 PM

A little more about the history of the area and the Jewish situation in the middle east.

From www.mideastweb.org
The archeological record indicates that the Jewish people evolved out of native Cana'anite peoples and invading tribes. Some time between about 1800 and 1500 B.C., it is thought that a Semitic people called Hebrews (hapiru) left Mesopotamia and settled in Canaan. Canaan was settled by different tribes including Semitic peoples, Hittites, and later Philistines, peoples of the sea who are thought to have arrived from Mycenae, or to be part of the ancient Greek peoples that also settled Mycenae.

According to the Bible, Moses led the Israelites, or a portion of them, out of Egypt. Under Joshua, they conquered the tribes and city states of Canaan. Based on biblical traditions, it is estimated that king David conquered Jerusalem about 1000 B.C. and established an Israelite kingdom over much of Canaan including parts of Transjordan. The kingdom was divided into Judea in the south and Israel in the north following the death of David's son, Solomon. Jerusalem remained the center of Jewish sovereignty and of Jewish worship whenever the Jews exercised sovereignty over the country in the subsequent period, up to the Jewish revolt in 133 AD.

The Assyrians conquered Israel in 722 or 721 B.C. The Babylonians conquered Judah around 586 B.C. They destroyed Solomon's Temple in Jerusalem, and exiled a large number of Jews. About 50 years later, the Persian king Cyrus conquered Babylonia. Cyrus allowed a group of Jews from Babylonia to rebuild Jerusalem and settle in it. However, a large number of Jews remained in Babylonia, forming the first Jewish Diaspora. After the reestablishment of a Jewish state or protectorate, the Babylonian exiles maintained contact with authorities there. The Persians ruled the land from about 530 to 331 B.C. Alexander the Great then conquered the Persian Empire. After Alexander's death in 323 B.C., his generals divided the empire. One of these generals, Seleucus, founded a dynasty that gained control of much of Palestine about 200 B.C. At first, the new rulers, called Seleucids, allowed the practice of Judaism. But later, one of the kings, Antiochus IV, tried to prohibit it. In 167 B.C., the Jews revolted under the leadership of the Maccabeans and either drove the Seleucids out of Palestine or at least established a large degree of autonomy, forming a kingdom with its capital in Jerusalem. The kingdom received Roman "protection" when Judah Maccabee was made a "friend of the Roman senate and people" in 164 B.C. according to the records of Roman historians.
About 61 B.C., Roman troops under Pompei invaded Judea and sacked Jerusalem in support of King Herod. Judea had become a client state of Rome. Initially it was ruled by the client Herodian dynasty. The land was divided into districts of Judea, Galilee, Peraea and a small trans-Jordanian section, each of which eventually came under direct Roman control. The Romans called the large central area of the land, which included Jerusalem, Judea. Jesus Christ was born in Bethlehem, Judea, in the early years of Roman rule. Roman rulers put down Jewish revolts in about A.D. 70 and A.D. 132. In A.D. 135, the Romans drove the Jews out of Jerusalem. The Romans named the area Palaestina, at about this time. The name Palaestina, which became Palestine in English, is derived from Herodotus, who used the term Palaistine Syria to refer to the entire southern part of Syria, meaning "Philistine Syria." Most of the Jews who continued to practice their religion fled or were forcibly exiled from Palestine, eventually forming a second Jewish Diaspora. However, Jewish communities continued to exist in Galilee, the northernmost part of Palestine. Palestine was governed by the Roman Empire until the fourth century A.D. (300's) and then by the Byzantine Empire. In time, Christianity spread to most of Palestine. The population consisted of Jewish converts to Christianity and paganism, peoples imported by the Romans, and others who had probably inhabited Palestine continuously.

During the seventh century (A.D. 600's), Muslim Arab armies moved north from Arabia to conquer most of the Middle East, including Palestine. Jerusalem was conquered about 638 by the Caliph Umar (Omar) who gave his protection to its inhabitants. Muslim powers controlled the region until the early 1900's. The rulers allowed Christians and Jews to keep their religions.
And it goes on...

08-02-2006, 03:21 AM	#17 (permalink)
treelizard Registered User Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: the desert Posts: 3,442 Groans: 0 Groaned at 0 Times in 0 Posts	Unprovoked border attacks are NOT "fair game" and if you don't see anything barbaric about cutting off body parts for fun, then I don't know what else to say. There is a difference between specifically targetting civilians (like the hundreds of Hezbollah missiles) and air strikes that are not intended to kill civilians. I'd say that dropping hundreds of leaflets calling on civilians to stay away from certain areas to avoid getting caught up in fighting would prove that Israel is not targetting civilians. __________________ http://www.dirttime.org http://morewomeninmma.blogspot.com

08-02-2006, 04:19 AM	#18 (permalink)
treelizard Registered User Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: the desert Posts: 3,442 Groans: 0 Groaned at 0 Times in 0 Posts	From thereligionofpeace.com: Current: Let’s put the current situation in the Middle East into a practical analogy that anyone can understand (even if they choose not to): Suppose that your house and my house are right next to each other. I make the choice to allow a sniper to operate on the upper floor of mine, from my children’s bedroom, in fact. The sniper fires indiscriminately into your house while I sit downstairs reading my newspaper. Eventually your family members start getting killed by the sniper operating from my upstairs bedroom, yet I ignore your pleas to stop the shooting. You then defend your own family by firing back in an effort to take out the sniper, even though it means that my children might be killed in the crossfire, despite your best efforts to avoid hitting them. As the bullets fly, the sniper holds my young ones up in front of him as a personal shield. Upon hearing that I am losing offspring in the gun battle, I rush upstairs and thank the sniper for his service to my family. Our civic community ignores the context of your actions and adamantly condemns them, while exhibiting very little concern for my sniper or my decision to allow him to kill your family members and precipitate the violence. Too bizarre to be true? Nope, this is reality. Islamic militants operate freely out of Lebanon and Gaza, killing and kidnapping Israelis, while hiding behind civilians - even launching rockets next to apartment buildings, knowing that retaliatory fire may doom the innocent lives inside. Yet, the international community serves only to condemn Israel for defending itself against these attacks. Want the violence to stop? Then forget your prejudices and preconceptions. Start condemning the parties that are directly responsible for the hostilities rather than bolstering their resolve. reference: http://www.theage.com.au/news/World/...198039135.html __________________ http://www.dirttime.org http://morewomeninmma.blogspot.com

08-11-2006, 04:42 PM	#23 (permalink)
Tim McFatridge Registered User Join Date: May 2006 Location: Waco, Tx. Posts: 279 Groans: 0 Groaned at 0 Times in 0 Posts	Israelites Sorry guys I had to jump in here on this one. I have to agree with Mike and treelizard on this one guys. Uke even after you tried to explain your position on the matter it is still very clear that you are not a supporter of Israel which is fine. Everyone is entitled to their own personal opinion. However, since you quoted the Bible and the name Israel I think it is only fair that we take a closer look at what the Bible has to say about the Israelites. Genesis 32: 24-28 says: "So Jacob was left alone, and a man wrestled with him till daybreak. When the man saw that he could not overpower him, he touched the socket of Jacob's hip so that his hip was wrenched as he wrestled with the man. The man said, "let me go, for it is daybreak." But Jacob replied, "I will not let you go unless you bless me." The man asked him, "What is your name?" "Jacob," he answered. Then the man said, "Your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel, because you have struggled with God and with men and have overcome." When God gave Jacob the name Israel he was giving Jacob a new life...a new start if you will. If you read the versus before you will also see that Jacob lived in the land of his father Abraham which was the land of Canaan. Abraham moved to Canaan after Sodom and Gamorah was destroyed by God. Jacob had 12 sons and one of them was Joseph. Joseph became the second in command in all of Egypt. When Egypt had the famine that lasted 7 years Joseph's brothers and his father Jacob(Israel) moved from Canaan to Goshen which was in Egypt to try and escape the famine that was going on across the country. Joseph went to Pharoah and told hin that his father and brothers along with all the flocks and herds and everything they own have come to Egypt. Pharoah told Joseph "to settle his father and his brothers in the best part of the land. Let them live in Goshen. And if you know of any among them with special ability, put them in charge of my own livestock." (Genesis 47: 6) Later in Exodus 1:6-15 we read about the Israelites being oppressed by the new Pharoah. "Now Joseph and all his brothers and all that generation died, but the Israelites were fruitful and multiplied greatly and became exceedingly numerous, so that the land was filled with them. Then a new king, who did not know about Joseph, came to power in Egypt. Look, he said to his people, the Israelites have become much too numerous for us. Come, we must deal with shrewdly with them or they will become even more numerous and if war breaks out, will join our enemies, fight against us and leave the country. If you read on you see that Pharoah put slave masters over them and forced them to do hard labor. But the more they were oppressed the more they multiplied and spread so the Egyptians came to dread the Israelites. Then you have Pharoah give an order to kill all the male children and let all the girls live. Now skip over to Numbers 13:1-3 and you will read: "The LORD said to Moses, Send some men to explore the land of Canaan, which I am giving to the Israelites." Sorry I did not mean to turn this into a bible study class but did feel that is was necessary to point all this out since Uke and Emptyness seem to think that Israel does not have any rights to the land they inhabit today. The battle that is going on in the Middle East has been going since the Israelites left Egypt and settled in Canaan. In order to understand it though you have to look at it from a religious perspective. All the countries surrounding Israel have always been enemies of Israel and enemies of anyone who calls them self an ally of Israel. The good news for us is that God promises to bless those who bless Israel and to curse those who curse Israel. If you disagree with the above information thats fine but understand...you are not disagreeing with me but with God. Also Uke you mentioned the media and how they show Israel as not doing anything wrong...I want to know what news channel you have been watching...because everything I see in the media is reporting on Israel being the ones to blame and not saying anything at all about Hezbolla doing anything wrong. I keep hearing and seeing reports from Beiruit and how so many women and children have been killed in the bombings but rarely hear anything about the innocent people killed in Israel when Hezbollah fires 90+ missiles into Israel. Again sorry to turn it into a bible study class but you really do have to go all the way back to those days to see that the Israelites have been run out of every land they inhabit. Oh sorry one more point. There may not have been a country called Israel but the land the Israelites inhabited has always been known as the Land of the Israelites. __________________ Tim McFatridge Integrated Submission Grappling JKD Kali Association - www.jkdkali.com

08-12-2006, 07:10 PM	#24 (permalink)
traveller Premiere Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: The name says it all -- I think Posts: 109 Groans: 0 Groaned at 0 Times in 0 Posts	Not doubt everyone knows where I stand on this issue from previous post. I am on nobodies side in this forum. I have my opinion and if you agree with me great, if you don't great. I have pos repped most of you for one post or another. If the issues are about religious claims to the land as Hizbollah quotes: they are unfounded. The muslim culture did not exist when the jews were enslaved in egypt. That is a fact. Sorry, but it is. So the jews have the religious seniority if you will. Unless somebody knows of one of these countries who still have a national religion based upon the sun god or the divinity of the pharoahs, or the greek or roman gods, etc. There has always been a jewish presence in what we call the middle east. Many Isreali jews today are not the descendants of those original jews. Many are. Many iranians are descendants of the persians. Many are not. The macedonians and greeks once ruled what we now consider the middle east, as did the romans. Many iraqi, palestinian, iranian, etc can trace their roots at least partly back to these ancestors. Meaning some of them might be WESTERNERS should you beleive some people's logic. The current lines of division among middle eastern states are not what they were pre-WWII (bravo whoever pointed that out). Here is my point, whatever side you are, you cannot make the argument of historical or ancestral national lines and what property once belonged to which group. Arguments from any of the countries in that region which used that as justification for their actions are just reaching for an excuse. Religion is a primary factor there, but not "the" only factor in the middle east. It it were I would need someone to explain to me the Iran-Iraq War, Iraqs invasion of Kuwait, etc. It is and always will be a about power. Leaders wishing for power use religion or nationalism to gather followers plain and simple. That is where it started. It may have taken on a nationalist or relgious furvor since, but it all started with a quest for power period. All that being said, let me get to what I really want to know. I think I can guess at most of your stances on all the following, but would everyone just answer the following with yes or no? Is Hizbollah justified in firing missiles at civilians? Is Israel justified attacking Hizbollah targets? Is Hizbollah a terrorrist organization? Is Israel a terrorist country? Do you like chocolate ice cream? __________________ Luck is not a very dependable Lady!

08-12-2006, 07:37 PM	#25 (permalink)
traveller Premiere Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: The name says it all -- I think Posts: 109 Groans: 0 Groaned at 0 Times in 0 Posts	I'll answer to get us started: No Yes Yes No Yes A few more questions if you feel inclined. It may help everyone see where someone's point of view is coming from. If you ae an American have you ever left the country (Canada and Mexico don't count)? Have you been to the Middle East? Have you been to Southwest Asia? Have you been to southeast asia? Have you been to South America? Have you been to Europe? Have you been to Africa? And just for fun: Did you vote republican or democrat in the last 3 pres elections? __________________ Luck is not a very dependable Lady!

08-13-2006, 03:56 PM	#26 (permalink)
traveller Premiere Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: The name says it all -- I think Posts: 109 Groans: 0 Groaned at 0 Times in 0 Posts	My answers to my 2nd set of Qs Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Republican Yes, I know some of what many refer to as southwest asia overlaps with what we call the middle east, and parts of africa as well depending on who you talk to. __________________ Luck is not a very dependable Lady!

08-14-2006, 01:58 AM	#27 (permalink)
EmptyneSs Registered User Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Cali Posts: 2,120 Groans: 0 Groaned at 0 Times in 0 Posts	do you guys think this new cease fire deal struck today is actually gonna have any effect? and is this a defeat for isreal? because if the war does end, the fact remains that they were not able to stop rockets from hitting israel, let alone defeating hezbollah as an organization. and if this is a defeat for israel, will it only embolden the etremist movements around the globe?? what about hezbollah? is their standing stronger now? israeli tanks have been rendered obsolete now too, as their most advanced armor has been repeatedly defeated by guerilla weaponry. history repeats itself, as a conventional army cannot defeat guerillas on their own terrain that have the popular support of their people. this is what happens when you dont know your enemy.

08-14-2006, 09:51 AM	#28 (permalink)
traveller Premiere Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: The name says it all -- I think Posts: 109 Groans: 0 Groaned at 0 Times in 0 Posts	Of course it will have an effect -- what the effect will be is the question. I wouldn't call it a defeat for Israel, because I don't believe they are done. This could just be tactical maneuvering on the part of Israel, or it could be something they have had in mind for quite some time. Israel is actually in a position now to say "see we stopped and "H" continues," should "H" do anything else. If any one else gets emboldened, Israel will say they are justified in attacking at full force instead of trying to only eliminate the attacker itself. If "H" keeps the peace they strengthen their position with some, and weaken it with others. Other extremist groups will see them as a weak link in an overall plan. Some major nation players may see this as a positive and be swayed a bit more twoard the "H" cause if they maintain the cease fire. Don't buy that the tanks are obsolete. The way they are being used is obsolete. If Israel chose to actually use a true combined force campaign with the proper support elements, you would see just how deadly those tanks are. Even if Israel just quit showing restraint and used a full armored assault the results would have be different and you would see less vulnerability in the "Israel" armored arsenal. It is hard to defeat guerrillas tactics, but it is even harder to fight within rules of engagement when your enemy has none. Every one expects "H" to fight the way they are fighting and shows little criticism. Every one expects a powerful nation like Israel to show restraint, keep the collateral damage as minimal as possible, and have concern for the civilian casualties they cause. Look at the U.S. situation. Insurgents in Iraq have killed more civilians than the U.S. has, and yet when the U.S. kills one civilian it is considered an attrocity. In this battle "H" seems to be the victor. Israel has been at this a long time however and still stands as a Nation in the midst of it's enemies. I doubt they consider the war to be ended. __________________ Luck is not a very dependable Lady!

08-14-2006, 10:59 AM	#29 (permalink)
Tim McFatridge Registered User Join Date: May 2006 Location: Waco, Tx. Posts: 279 Groans: 0 Groaned at 0 Times in 0 Posts	I would not consider this a loss for Israel either. Israel is smart and I think they are fully aware of what they are doing. I think like traveller said this is part of their plan so Israel can show the world that they stopped. I also think Hezbollah will once again attack Israel within the next few days then you see Israel answer with full force. History does repeat itself if we do not learn from our past. Go back and look at the Israeli 6 day war...that was some serious butt kicking on Israel parts. How many enemies did they defeat? and how many bases did they destroy? and how many fronts were they fighting on all at once? and at the end of six days Israel was standing strong and the enemy had no more fighter jets, no more functional bases. The fighting over there will never stop regardless of what the world does because they are all brought up to hate one another because of religious beliefs. It makes me really thankful to be living in a country where I can sleep in peace at night and even thankful that I am able to buy gas for what I can. Also makes me really thankful for our men and women who serve this country proudly. __________________ Tim McFatridge Integrated Submission Grappling JKD Kali Association - www.jkdkali.com

08-14-2006, 02:13 PM	#30 (permalink)
traveller Premiere Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: The name says it all -- I think Posts: 109 Groans: 0 Groaned at 0 Times in 0 Posts	A little more about the history of the area and the Jewish situation in the middle east. From www.mideastweb.org The archeological record indicates that the Jewish people evolved out of native Cana'anite peoples and invading tribes. Some time between about 1800 and 1500 B.C., it is thought that a Semitic people called Hebrews (hapiru) left Mesopotamia and settled in Canaan. Canaan was settled by different tribes including Semitic peoples, Hittites, and later Philistines, peoples of the sea who are thought to have arrived from Mycenae, or to be part of the ancient Greek peoples that also settled Mycenae. According to the Bible, Moses led the Israelites, or a portion of them, out of Egypt. Under Joshua, they conquered the tribes and city states of Canaan. Based on biblical traditions, it is estimated that king David conquered Jerusalem about 1000 B.C. and established an Israelite kingdom over much of Canaan including parts of Transjordan. The kingdom was divided into Judea in the south and Israel in the north following the death of David's son, Solomon. Jerusalem remained the center of Jewish sovereignty and of Jewish worship whenever the Jews exercised sovereignty over the country in the subsequent period, up to the Jewish revolt in 133 AD. The Assyrians conquered Israel in 722 or 721 B.C. The Babylonians conquered Judah around 586 B.C. They destroyed Solomon's Temple in Jerusalem, and exiled a large number of Jews. About 50 years later, the Persian king Cyrus conquered Babylonia. Cyrus allowed a group of Jews from Babylonia to rebuild Jerusalem and settle in it. However, a large number of Jews remained in Babylonia, forming the first Jewish Diaspora. After the reestablishment of a Jewish state or protectorate, the Babylonian exiles maintained contact with authorities there. The Persians ruled the land from about 530 to 331 B.C. Alexander the Great then conquered the Persian Empire. After Alexander's death in 323 B.C., his generals divided the empire. One of these generals, Seleucus, founded a dynasty that gained control of much of Palestine about 200 B.C. At first, the new rulers, called Seleucids, allowed the practice of Judaism. But later, one of the kings, Antiochus IV, tried to prohibit it. In 167 B.C., the Jews revolted under the leadership of the Maccabeans and either drove the Seleucids out of Palestine or at least established a large degree of autonomy, forming a kingdom with its capital in Jerusalem. The kingdom received Roman "protection" when Judah Maccabee was made a "friend of the Roman senate and people" in 164 B.C. according to the records of Roman historians. About 61 B.C., Roman troops under Pompei invaded Judea and sacked Jerusalem in support of King Herod. Judea had become a client state of Rome. Initially it was ruled by the client Herodian dynasty. The land was divided into districts of Judea, Galilee, Peraea and a small trans-Jordanian section, each of which eventually came under direct Roman control. The Romans called the large central area of the land, which included Jerusalem, Judea. Jesus Christ was born in Bethlehem, Judea, in the early years of Roman rule. Roman rulers put down Jewish revolts in about A.D. 70 and A.D. 132. In A.D. 135, the Romans drove the Jews out of Jerusalem. The Romans named the area Palaestina, at about this time. The name Palaestina, which became Palestine in English, is derived from Herodotus, who used the term Palaistine Syria to refer to the entire southern part of Syria, meaning "Philistine Syria." Most of the Jews who continued to practice their religion fled or were forcibly exiled from Palestine, eventually forming a second Jewish Diaspora. However, Jewish communities continued to exist in Galilee, the northernmost part of Palestine. Palestine was governed by the Roman Empire until the fourth century A.D. (300's) and then by the Byzantine Empire. In time, Christianity spread to most of Palestine. The population consisted of Jewish converts to Christianity and paganism, peoples imported by the Romans, and others who had probably inhabited Palestine continuously. During the seventh century (A.D. 600's), Muslim Arab armies moved north from Arabia to conquer most of the Middle East, including Palestine. Jerusalem was conquered about 638 by the Caliph Umar (Omar) who gave his protection to its inhabitants. Muslim powers controlled the region until the early 1900's. The rulers allowed Christians and Jews to keep their religions. And it goes on... __________________ Luck is not a very dependable Lady!

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Israel expands Gaza offensive	BoarSpear	Open Access	4	09-12-2006 03:47 AM