Despite Cease Fire Israeli Forces Conduct Raids Into Lebanon.

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Aisengard
CaptnKirk, if Iran and Syria cut off assistance to Hezbollah...well, there never would have been this war, would there.

And if Israel hadn't decided breaching the cease fire was a good idea, nobody would be "at war" at the moment, would they?

This is exactly the kind of BS I'm talking about...this disregard for what Israel might do in favor of just blaming everything on Hezbollah and others, implicitly excusing Israel's bad behavior. What's done is done, I thought the goal at this point was PEACE...no?

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Aisengard
CaptnKirk, if Iran and Syria cut off assistance to Hezbollah...well, there never would have been this war, would there.

And if Israel hadn't decided breaching the cease fire was a good idea, nobody would be "at war" at the moment, would they?

If the reports are correct that they were stockpiling new weapons, and considering that their stated goal is to destroy Israel, I don't think that's a sound assumption.

 

[Harabec]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Aisengard
CaptnKirk, if Iran and Syria cut off assistance to Hezbollah...well, there never would have been this war, would there.

And if Israel hadn't decided breaching the cease fire was a good idea, nobody would be "at war" at the moment, would they?

This is exactly the kind of BS I'm talking about...this disregard for what Israel might do in favor of just blaming everything on Hezbollah and others, implicitly excusing Israel's bad behavior. What's done is done, I thought the goal at this point was PEACE...no?

We are not currently "at war".
This just comes down to what the government thinks of UN resolutions (I personally believe they're totally worthless, but for other reasons that have nothing to do with anything in the middle east) and the current situation in Lebanon.
Our forces are still there, still at risk and sometimes you have an opportunity you think you cannot pass.

Personally I don't like the last air attack and think our political and military leaders have failed the people and should retire immediately. A bunch of idiots.
You'll never hear the real stories from Lebenon, but I can tell you the campaign was one big screw up. If the army doesn't learn from it, we're doomed.

EDIT: This post gives some of the reasons why I dislike the UN in its current form. They create never-ending conflicts that have no real winner, only countless dead over the years.

 

[Lemon law]

What this shows to a certain extent is that the Israeli intel is dated----many of the civilians deaths were caused by Israel bombing homes where Hezbollah leaders used to live
months and years before.

Which also implies it will be open season on new intel operations within arab terroritory. The massoud will continue its campaign of assinations of suspected Hezbollah leaders on foreign soil. An area where Israel still holds the moral lowground in this conflict. ---but I strongly suspect a growing number of massoud agents and hirlings will be found hanging from palm trees all over the arab mid-east when their identities are exposed.-----Hezbollah was clearly effective in catching Israeli intelligence asleep and not up to date.

And now Israel must risk much to play catch up intel.-----perhaps the greatest single area of Israeli failure of this current crisis.

 

[kage69]

Simply the fact that the media is not jumping all over this, and Kofi is not immediately condemning all of Israel, is proof enough that they don't want egg on their face when this is brought up.

You were saying?



Once again I find myself wishing the UN had a little more balls, and a quicker step to boot. Hezbollah receiving more arms is unacceptable, as is Israel giving everyone the bird.

 

[shira]

Originally posted by: The Green Bean

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Sanctions should be imposed on Israel for first breaking numerous Human rights and now failing to honour the resolution. Too bad the U.N is so weak and the U.S is so biased.

Because WE ALL KNOW that the Lebanese government and Hezbollah ALWAYS follow the UN resolutions and care more than anyone else about human rights.

So does that give Israel a right to break U.N reslutions? If an Embargo is imposed on Hezbollah, a similar Embargo should be imposed on Isreal. Israel is not better than Hezbollah in its honouring reslutions.

By definition, if one side violates the terms of the agreement, then no agreement exists and the other side may retaliate.

If indeed Hezbollah is using the cease-fire to rearm - in violation of the agreement - why on earth do you think that Israel would still be bound by the agreement?

 

[Drift3r]

Originally posted by: shira

Originally posted by: The Green Bean

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Sanctions should be imposed on Israel for first breaking numerous Human rights and now failing to honour the resolution. Too bad the U.N is so weak and the U.S is so biased.

Because WE ALL KNOW that the Lebanese government and Hezbollah ALWAYS follow the UN resolutions and care more than anyone else about human rights.

So does that give Israel a right to break U.N reslutions? If an Embargo is imposed on Hezbollah, a similar Embargo should be imposed on Isreal. Israel is not better than Hezbollah in its honouring reslutions.

By definition, if one side violates the terms of the agreement, then no agreement exists and the other side may retaliate.

If indeed Hezbollah is using the cease-fire to rearm - in violation of the agreement - why on earth do you think that Israel would still be bound by the agreement?

You have to be able to prove it using hard facts and intelligence. Using "if's" or "we think" is not fact or evidence.

 

[The Green Bean]

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: shira

Originally posted by: The Green Bean

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Sanctions should be imposed on Israel for first breaking numerous Human rights and now failing to honour the resolution. Too bad the U.N is so weak and the U.S is so biased.

Because WE ALL KNOW that the Lebanese government and Hezbollah ALWAYS follow the UN resolutions and care more than anyone else about human rights.

So does that give Israel a right to break U.N reslutions? If an Embargo is imposed on Hezbollah, a similar Embargo should be imposed on Isreal. Israel is not better than Hezbollah in its honouring reslutions.

By definition, if one side violates the terms of the agreement, then no agreement exists and the other side may retaliate.

If indeed Hezbollah is using the cease-fire to rearm - in violation of the agreement - why on earth do you think that Israel would still be bound by the agreement?

You have to be able to prove it using hard facts and intelligence. Using "if's" or "we think" is not fact or evidence.

:thumbsup:

 

[Lemon law]

Can some one please explain to me how this Israelie incursion into Lebanon---and Northern Lebanon near the Syrian border at that---could be construed by anyone as an attempt by Hezbollah to resupply and threaten Israel at the point of danger.---which exists only at the exact other end of the country.---and therefore is NOT an immediate threat to Israel justifying a breaking of a cease fire?

Where were all the arms conveys that were stopped and blown up to justify these claims of resupply?

Well, I read the news accounts--------and I have another conclusion------this was an attempt by Israel to simply kidnap or assinate a Hezbollah member on Lebanese soil. And when a
foreign government dresses up its soldiers in anothers armies uniform on foreign soil----then under all rules of war---they can be shot as spies.---without the niceties of treating them as prisoners of war.

And as far as can be proved by Israel, said Hezbollah member was complying with the cease fire--------and therefore, Israel WAS 100% in the wrong and should be properly condemmed for breaking the cease fire.---------and this resupply thing is just a total red herring.

 

[shira]

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: shira

Originally posted by: The Green Bean

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Sanctions should be imposed on Israel for first breaking numerous Human rights and now failing to honour the resolution. Too bad the U.N is so weak and the U.S is so biased.

Because WE ALL KNOW that the Lebanese government and Hezbollah ALWAYS follow the UN resolutions and care more than anyone else about human rights.

So does that give Israel a right to break U.N reslutions? If an Embargo is imposed on Hezbollah, a similar Embargo should be imposed on Isreal. Israel is not better than Hezbollah in its honouring reslutions.

By definition, if one side violates the terms of the agreement, then no agreement exists and the other side may retaliate.

If indeed Hezbollah is using the cease-fire to rearm - in violation of the agreement - why on earth do you think that Israel would still be bound by the agreement?

You have to be able to prove it using hard facts and intelligence. Using "if's" or "we think" is not fact or evidence.

Really, so much of this is just common sense, it amazes me that one needs to resort to formal definitions. I include relevant info below, but really, think about what we're talking about:

Two entities - Y and Z - enter into an agreement and make certain promises as to their actions under the agreement. Side Y violates a term of the agreement. According to you, Z is still bound. Side Y again violates a term of the agreement. Z is still bound. Y again violates a term, Z is still bound. . . . .

What is wrong with this picture? If you don't get it, you just don't get it.

Definition of Treaty

Here are excerpts:

A treaty is a binding agreement under international law entered into by actors in international law, namely states and international organizations. Treaties are called by several names: treaties, international agreements, protocols, covenants, conventions, exchanges of letters, exchanges of notes, etc. Regardless of the name chosen, all of these international agreements under international law are equally treaties and the rules are the same.

Suspension and termination

If a party has materially violated, or breached, its treaty obligations, the other parties may invoke this breach as grounds for temporarily suspending their obligations to that party under the treaty. A material breach may also be invoked as grounds for permanently terminating the treaty itself.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Aisengard
CaptnKirk, if Iran and Syria cut off assistance to Hezbollah...well, there never would have been this war, would there.

And if Israel hadn't decided breaching the cease fire was a good idea, nobody would be "at war" at the moment, would they?

If the reports are correct that they were stockpiling new weapons, and considering that their stated goal is to destroy Israel, I don't think that's a sound assumption.

Surely though, Israel has proof that this was happening, right? Or was Hezbollah taking shipments of "yellow cake?"

Of all people Harvey, I'd expect you to expect some morsel of proof before mounting an invasion of another country.

 

[Drift3r]

Originally posted by: shira

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: shira

Originally posted by: The Green Bean

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Sanctions should be imposed on Israel for first breaking numerous Human rights and now failing to honour the resolution. Too bad the U.N is so weak and the U.S is so biased.

Because WE ALL KNOW that the Lebanese government and Hezbollah ALWAYS follow the UN resolutions and care more than anyone else about human rights.

So does that give Israel a right to break U.N reslutions? If an Embargo is imposed on Hezbollah, a similar Embargo should be imposed on Isreal. Israel is not better than Hezbollah in its honouring reslutions.

By definition, if one side violates the terms of the agreement, then no agreement exists and the other side may retaliate.

If indeed Hezbollah is using the cease-fire to rearm - in violation of the agreement - why on earth do you think that Israel would still be bound by the agreement?

You have to be able to prove it using hard facts and intelligence. Using "if's" or "we think" is not fact or evidence.

Really, so much of this is just common sense, it amazes me that one needs to resort to formal definitions. I include relevant info below, but really, think about what we're talking about:

Two entities - Y and Z - enter into an agreement and make certain promises as to their actions under the agreement. Side Y violates a term of the agreement. According to you, Z is still bound. Side Y again violates a term of the agreement. Z is still bound. Y again violates a term, Z is still bound. . . . .

What is wrong with this picture? If you don't get it, you just don't get it.

Definition of Treaty

Here are excerpts:

A treaty is a binding agreement under international law entered into by actors in international law, namely states and international organizations. Treaties are called by several names: treaties, international agreements, protocols, covenants, conventions, exchanges of letters, exchanges of notes, etc. Regardless of the name chosen, all of these international agreements under international law are equally treaties and the rules are the same.

Suspension and termination

If a party has materially violated, or breached, its treaty obligations, the other parties may invoke this breach as grounds for temporarily suspending their obligations to that party under the treaty. A material breach may also be invoked as grounds for permanently terminating the treaty itself.

Where is the evidence that Hezbollah violated the cease-fire terms of this current agreement ? Truth is right now there is none that I am aware of other then statements made by the IDF press office which doesn't amount to much more then a hill of beans to me.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Drift3r
Where is the evidence that Hezbollah violated the cease-fire terms ? There is none that I am aware of other then statements made by the IDF press office.

Where is the evidence they weren't resupplying their arms stash? Without confirmed evidence, one way or the other, this entire discussion is all meaningless masturbatory speculation based on nothing but personal biases. :roll:

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: Drift3r
Where is the evidence that Hezbollah violated the cease-fire terms ? There is none that I am aware of other then statements made by the IDF press office.

Where is the evidence they weren't resupplying their arms stash? Without confirmed evidence, one way or the other, this entire discussion is all meaningless masturbatory speculation based on nothing but personal biases. :roll:

You're right, it IS speculation, but as usual, the burden of proof is on the accuser. Right now we can PROVE that Israel did what people are accusing them of doing...no such proof exists for the other guys. The only reasonable way to approach a situation with accusations based on personal biases is to assume things not proven are not true.

 

[Drift3r]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: Drift3r
Where is the evidence that Hezbollah violated the cease-fire terms ? There is none that I am aware of other then statements made by the IDF press office.

Where is the evidence they weren't resupplying their arms stash? Without confirmed evidence, one way or the other, this entire discussion is all meaningless masturbatory speculation based on nothing but personal biases. :roll:

That is a very flawed and illogical argument. The fact is one side has violated a cease-fire agreement and has failed to provide any credible evidence so far as to why they did so. If this becomes a trend then any ability to honestly broker any sort of future deals or agreements is pointless when such flawed arguments are being put in play. Especially if one or the other side feels it's entitled to do so no matter what based on perceived threats.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Drift3r
That is a very flawed and illogical agruement. The fact is one side has violated a cease-fire and failed to proved any crediable evidence so far as to why they did so. If this becomes a trend any ability to honestly broker any sort of deal or agreements is pointless. Especially if one or the other side feels it's entitled to do so no matter what based on precived threats.

No, it isn't. Israel doesn't deny their actions, but they assert a valid reason for them.

Despite the cease fire agreement, the proposed intervening international force is nowhere to be found. The question of whether Isreail is right or wrong depends on the truth behind their claim that they did it to stop an immediate threat. Who else is going to stop Hezbollah from restocking their arms and munitions? The 400 troops promised, but not yet delivered, by France? :roll:

All I'm saying is, without confirmed facts, this entire discussion is a monumental jackoff. Your mother warned you that, if you don't stop it, you'll go blind. From a political standepoint, it's obviously too late for some to prevent that.

 

[Deptacon]

Originally posted by: Drift3r
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060819/ap_on_re_mi_ea/lebanon_israel


It seems Israel thinks that it is free to do whatever it wants despite signing a cease fire. This action is not a smart one IMHO though I suspect the media will ignore these types of provocations if and when this conflict flares up again and the blame will be placed on Lebanon.

you mean a UN document, we know how far and how useful those are

 

[imported_dna]

It?s is quite funny for people here such as BoberFett, Lemon Law, Drift3r, and others, now demand a justification for every action that Israel takes, yet I?m sure they made no such demands when Hezbollah killed and kidnapped some soldiers. It was common knowledge a month ago: Hezbollah, the great defender of the people, committed this act of aggression because of the state of Shebaa Farms, as well as all those thousands (maybe millions?) of Lebanese prisoners, rotting in Israeli priosons.

Of course, smarter people know that the Shebaa farms were never Lebanese territory, and plenty of the Lebanese prisoners are actually terrorists like Samir Kuntar, responsible for the murder of women, children, and babies.

The people I mentioned in my opening paragraph cry foul over every action taken by Israel, and immediately invoke the specter of International Law, and UN Resolutions. This appears to be common procedure in the Arab world ? try to do it by force, and if you fail, then cry foul, and ask the international community for help. Example: the refugee problem.

The refugees in 1948 left their homes heeding calls by the Arab League, and then the attempt to settle the matter by force commenced. At the end of the war, after loosing, the Arab League did not allow the refugees to return to what became Israel, since it was inconceivable. Not only that ? Arab states voted against UN Resolution 194 which urged that the refugee problem be resolved. What do we have today? We have Arab leaders left and right, yelling and screaming about refugee?s ?right-of-return? based on ? you guessed it ? UN Resolution 194; they also bemoan the squalor of refugee camps, which, incidentally, have been in their countries for the past 60 years. Any western state in this situation would?ve granted citizenship to refugees by now.

Here?s a term for y?all: sore losers.

 

[kylebisme]

The people who lived in Shebaa Farms before Israel commandeered the area considered themselves to be Lebanese just as the people of the town of Shebaa do, and the latter is undisputed Lebanese territory. And beyond people like Samir Kuntar, many prisoners held by Israel have not been judged guilty of any crimes.

As for 1948, Israel ran many non-Jewish out simply because there were not enough Jewish people in the region to have a Jewish state without displacing much of the indigenous population and never allowing their return.

 

[imported_dna]

People can consider themselves whatever they wish, it does not negate the fact that maps issued after 1948 by both Syria and Lebanon placed the Shebaa Farms within Syria?s borders; you should read the following article.

How many people are there supposedly held? We?ve already seen in this past engagement that Hezbolla has a knack for exaggerating numbers (just like the Palestinians, and their alleged massacres), so a list would be helpful.

As for the refugees issue, I thought I already gave you plenty of info, but I see I?ll have to do it again, so you don?t mislead other people. I?ll post a message on this a bit later, when I have my resources at hand.

EDIT:
Let me add this: can you prove that people were run out?

 

[Lemon law]

To dna,

Yes I decry the actions of Hezbollah as well-----this entire mid-east mess is just piling on wrong on another on another---and you keep accused terrorists who allegedly murdered women and children while not condemming IDF personnel who did the same---some from the safety of some airplane---but women and children die either way.

While I as an observer just consider both sides wrong---as you both deepen the hatreds----we need a means to settle this without killing.

Its Aholes like you dna that glory in war and killing---and think that you will prevail by telling me the other guy is a turkey----when both sides are equally stubborn and equally wrong.

But it may come as a shock to Israel, who has enjoyed a favorable biased American press for perhaps too long, that a substantial amount of American Public opinion is now directed against Israel---and as Israel turns to the right with no voice of moderation left----I just hope that opinions on this forum will give Isreal pause before it really does something stupid.

 

[Drift3r]

Originally posted by: Deptacon

Originally posted by: Drift3r
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060819/ap_on_re_mi_ea/lebanon_israel


It seems Israel thinks that it is free to do whatever it wants despite signing a cease fire. This action is not a smart one IMHO though I suspect the media will ignore these types of provocations if and when this conflict flares up again and the blame will be placed on Lebanon.

you mean a UN document, we know how far and how useful those are

So what agreement would Israel honor if not a UN/US brokered agreement ?

 

[linkgoron]

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: Deptacon

Originally posted by: Drift3r
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060819/ap_on_re_mi_ea/lebanon_israel


It seems Israel thinks that it is free to do whatever it wants despite signing a cease fire. This action is not a smart one IMHO though I suspect the media will ignore these types of provocations if and when this conflict flares up again and the blame will be placed on Lebanon.

you mean a UN document, we know how far and how useful those are

So what agreement would Israel honor if not a UN/US brokered agreement ?

Lebannon already said that they won't disarm Hezbullah. Isn't that against the UN document?

 

[imported_dna]

Lemon Law, you are a turkey, just by the simple fact that you are accusing the IDF of murder, and comparing them to the likes of Samir Kuntar; that guy sneaked in with his buddies, and murdered cillians. The IDF gave advance warning, and only then struk. To the curious death of people in Qana you must add the questionable tactics of Hezbollah.

I do not revel in the death of others ? I simply hate it when people cry foul over things of their own doing (yes, Qana included). I see no point in condeming a military strike against a military target ? that's right, Hezbolla turned that village into a military target, and the people there were its responsibility.

 

[Lemon law]

So the massod sneaking into a sorveign country and murdering its citizens is different?---which is a typical Israeli prior act and what happened recently when Israel violated the cease fire.

Morally you occupy the same low nitch of moral degenerates.---and lest you be confused of any of my actions---I am thousands of miles away and doing nothing but giving you my opinion.--------learn it and live it---both sides are wrong---and this needs settled fairly by neutral third parties.---or this whole region is going to turn into a bloodbath no one will like.

Quit trying to justify Israel's actions---no body is buying it any more---put some damn energy into figuring out how to get a just peace for a change.---and getting the hatreds down.