Olmert tells Europe to stop preaching to Israel

[Aisengard]

http://reuters.myway.com/article/200608...T_0_NEWS-MIDEAST-OLMERT-EUROPE-DC.html

"Where do they get the right to preach to Israel?" Olmert said when asked about criticism from European capitals of Israeli military operations that have led to a heavy civilian toll.

"European countries attacked Kosovo and killed ten thousand civilians. Ten thousand! And none of these countries had to suffer before that from a single rocket.

"I'm not saying it was wrong to intervene in Kosovo. But please: Don't preach to us about the treatment of civilians."

Damn right. This offensive has been one of the most restrained in human history. Usually when countries invade another, there are thousands upon thousands of deaths. Israel, in spite of Hezbollah has made sure to minimize civilian casualties.

The problem is a matter of perspective, combined with just a general dislike of Israel that has its roots in the vast amounts of anti-semitism around the world before and after World War II.

 

[ThePresence]

Ooops, posted in wrong thread.

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: ThePresence
I saw Netanyahu on CNN International. The anchor asked him about Human Rights Watch's assertion that Israel committed 'war crimes'. He said that according to HRW Winston Churchill must've been the biggest war criminal of all time because he responded to the rocketing of London with bombing Germany. Indiscriminately. Killing hundreds of thousands of German civillians.

This kind of reasoning is dangerous. For example, the United States place thousands Japanese into internment camps. Does that mean its okay to do it now?

 

[ThePresence]

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: ThePresence
I saw Netanyahu on CNN International. The anchor asked him about Human Rights Watch's assertion that Israel committed 'war crimes'. He said that according to HRW Winston Churchill must've been the biggest war criminal of all time because he responded to the rocketing of London with bombing Germany. Indiscriminately. Killing hundreds of thousands of German civillians.

This kind of reasoning is dangerous. For example, the United States place thousands Japanese into internment camps. Does that mean its okay to do it now?

I moved my comment to the thread which it was meant to be in, but I will respond here because you posted it here. I don't want to take the thread off-track...
That's a bad comparison. Most people today recognize the problem with what the US did, and it's dubious success and it's not hailed as a great achievment. Churchill's response to the V2 attacks is.

 

[lozina]

So is Olmert suggesting that as in the European response to Kosovo, NATO should launch an air campaign on Israel?

 

[Aisengard]

Originally posted by: lozina
So is Olmert suggesting that as in the European response to Kosovo, NATO should launch an air campaign on Israel?

Um, Israel is nothing like Kosovo. At all. Nice try avoiding the issue, though.

 

[lozina]

Originally posted by: Aisengard

Originally posted by: lozina
So is Olmert suggesting that as in the European response to Kosovo, NATO should launch an air campaign on Israel?

Um, Israel is nothing like Kosovo. At all. Nice try avoiding the issue, though.

Hey if Olmert can make nonsensical comparisons so can I. And anyway the analogy would then be that Israel is Serbia, Lebanon is Kosovo.

 

[Jaskalas]

Peace comes when Hezbollah can no longer make war. The UN is demanding peace prematurely, during which Hezbollah would re-arm only to strike again.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Olmert is grasping at air.

At first they were going to 'destroy' Hezbollah.

Then they were going to greatly diminish Hezbollah.

Then they were going to create a security zone until a 'robust' multinational force arrives.

Olmert/Israel screwed the pooch on this one. It was a bad situation that they've made worse.

 

[The Green Bean]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Peace comes when Hezbollah can no longer make war. The UN is demanding peace prematurely, during which Hezbollah would re-arm only to strike again.

Peace comes when Israel can longer make war.

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: Aisengard
http://reuters.myway.com/article/200608...T_0_NEWS-MIDEAST-OLMERT-EUROPE-DC.html

"Where do they get the right to preach to Israel?" Olmert said when asked about criticism from European capitals of Israeli military operations that have led to a heavy civilian toll.

"European countries attacked Kosovo and killed ten thousand civilians. Ten thousand! And none of these countries had to suffer before that from a single rocket.

"I'm not saying it was wrong to intervene in Kosovo. But please: Don't preach to us about the treatment of civilians."

Damn right. This offensive has been one of the most restrained in human history. Usually when countries invade another, there are thousands upon thousands of deaths. Israel, in spite of Hezbollah has made sure to minimize civilian casualties.

The problem is a matter of perspective, combined with just a general dislike of Israel that has its roots in the vast amounts of anti-semitism around the world before and after World War II.

This just shows how shameless Israelis and their support are in justifying their attacks in Lebanon. NATO bombed Kosovo to stop genocide comiitted by Milosevic that had already killed tens of thousands. They were using their money and resource in a selfless act to prevent more people from dying.

Israelis on the other hand started the conflict because 2 of their soldiers were captured and 3 were killed. There were no missile attack before the Israeli invasion (not from Hezbollah at least). They have now killed close to 1000 civilian and displaced close to million because of their own self interest, or even worst, just to make a political statement without regard for Lebanese life.

Gotta make you puke to see people even try to compare the two.

 

[Mail5398]

The real problem is the meddling of Syria and Iran in Lebanon. Israel's war is against Syria and Iran. Unfortunately, the Lebanese people have to pay for it. Israel, Syria, and Iran ought to go ahead and duke it out until a victor is declared.

 

[Aisengard]

Originally posted by: Mail5398
The real problem is the meddling of Syria and Iran in Lebanon. Israel's war is against Syria and Iran. Unfortunately, the Lebanese people have to pay for it. Israel, Syria, and Iran ought to go ahead and duke it out until a victor is declared.

That's hard to do when the Hezbollah cowards hide behind the civilians they're supposedly "protecting." Meanwhile Hezbollah offers up civilians as sacrifice.

 

[babylon5]

I am sure the 20 children buried under the building at Qana would agree how Israel minimize civilian casualties with supposedly precise American made weapon that sent them to heaven.

Israel will never win. It is the green color family in a blue color neighborhood. This war only makes more people angry at them. It's a lost battle for them no matter what.

 

[daniel49]

Originally posted by: Aisengard

Originally posted by: lozina
So is Olmert suggesting that as in the European response to Kosovo, NATO should launch an air campaign on Israel?

Um, Israel is nothing like Kosovo. At all. Nice try avoiding the issue, though.

what were you expecting from the Hezbolla fanbois?

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: The Green Bean

Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Peace comes when Hezbollah can no longer make war. The UN is demanding peace prematurely, during which Hezbollah would re-arm only to strike again.

Peace comes when Israel can longer make war.

You have your side and I have mine.

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: ThePresence
I saw Netanyahu on CNN International. The anchor asked him about Human Rights Watch's assertion that Israel committed 'war crimes'. He said that according to HRW Winston Churchill must've been the biggest war criminal of all time because he responded to the rocketing of London with bombing Germany. Indiscriminately. Killing hundreds of thousands of German civillians.

This kind of reasoning is dangerous. For example, the United States place thousands Japanese into internment camps. Does that mean its okay to do it now?

I moved my comment to the thread which it was meant to be in, but I will respond here because you posted it here. I don't want to take the thread off-track...
That's a bad comparison. Most people today recognize the problem with what the US did, and it's dubious success and it's not hailed as a great achievment. Churchill's response to the V2 attacks is.

They also realized the problems with collectively punishing civilians and indiscriminate attacks on civilians thus codified it into the Geneva Conventions.

 

[GrGr]

So Olmert and Netanyahu are sounding like desperate bloggers sprouting flimsy rethoric in order to score some dubious point. These guys represent the top of Israel's political leadership?

 

[Aisengard]

Originally posted by: babylon5
I am sure the 20 children buried under the building at Qana would agree how Israel minimize civilian casualties with supposedly precise American made weapon that sent them to heaven.

Israel will never win. It is the green color family in a blue color neighborhood. This war only makes more people angry at them. It's a lost battle for them no matter what.

I'm sure they also loved it when their 'protectors', you know, Hezbollah, put weapons in their basement and let the Israelis know about it so they would have no choice but to bomb it, however, minimising the risk by letting everyone know sometimes days ahead of time, no matter the danger to their own troops by letting Hezbollah know exactly when and where they'd be fighting.

Israel could have done nothing against the rocket attacks and kidnappings of their soldiers, they could have released the proud murderer they put into jail for exchange of the soldiers, as they had many times before. But they didn't. They'd had enough of taking ****** from everyone, and unlike America and Iraq, these people were actually a threat to their nation, publicly stated even, and it's even been stated by the Egyptian guy that they have every right to defend themselves. The ONLY reason civilians are dying is because the UN is taking so long in drafting a resolution. And THEN, when they finally DO draft a resolution it's rejected by Lebanon because it didn't include the complete destruction of Israel.

If a ceace-fire is finally agreed to, and an international force succeeds in disarming Hezbollah and a permanent UN-controlled buffer zone is set up between Israel and everyone, and a lasting peace is finally achieved (starry-eyed hope, I know), we can look back at this and say Israel made the right decision. It'll take time, but when has 1000 accidental civilian deaths over months of bombing civilian/terrorist areas ever been seen as a 'horrible massacre'?

Perspective. Sorry this turned into an off-topic rant.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Aisengard

Originally posted by: babylon5
I am sure the 20 children buried under the building at Qana would agree how Israel minimize civilian casualties with supposedly precise American made weapon that sent them to heaven.

Israel will never win. It is the green color family in a blue color neighborhood. This war only makes more people angry at them. It's a lost battle for them no matter what.

I'm sure they also loved it when their 'protectors', you know, Hezbollah, put weapons in their basement and let the Israelis know about it so they would have no choice but to bomb it, however, minimising the risk by letting everyone know sometimes days ahead of time, no matter the danger to their own troops by letting Hezbollah know exactly when and where they'd be fighting.

Israel could have done nothing against the rocket attacks and kidnappings of their soldiers, they could have released the proud murderer they put into jail for exchange of the soldiers, as they had many times before. But they didn't. They'd had enough of taking ****** from everyone, and unlike America and Iraq, these people were actually a threat to their nation, publicly stated even, and it's even been stated by the Egyptian guy that they have every right to defend themselves. The ONLY reason civilians are dying is because the UN is taking so long in drafting a resolution. And THEN, when they finally DO draft a resolution it's rejected by Lebanon because it didn't include the complete destruction of Israel.

If a ceace-fire is finally agreed to, and an international force succeeds in disarming Hezbollah and a permanent UN-controlled buffer zone is set up between Israel and everyone, and a lasting peace is finally achieved (starry-eyed hope, I know), we can look back at this and say Israel made the right decision. It'll take time, but when has 1000 accidental civilian deaths over months of bombing civilian/terrorist areas ever been seen as a 'horrible massacre'?

Perspective. Sorry this turned into an off-topic rant.

No, the ONLY reason those people are dead is because the Israelis killed them. If you really believe they are in the right, stop trying to sugar coat it, be honest. If you can't own up to the fact that those people are dead because Israeli bombs landed on their homes...what does that say about what you really believe is going on here?

Speaking of the right decision...what is Israel accomplishing here? At BEST they are dealing a temporary blow to Hezbollah while at the same time very much damaging their already less than great reputation with the rest of the world. I admit, it's a good way to force a UN response...but it seems like there might have been better ways of doing so.

 

[Tequila]

Originally posted by: Aisengard
http://reuters.myway.com/article/200608...T_0_NEWS-MIDEAST-OLMERT-EUROPE-DC.html

"Where do they get the right to preach to Israel?" Olmert said when asked about criticism from European capitals of Israeli military operations that have led to a heavy civilian toll.

"European countries attacked Kosovo and killed ten thousand civilians. Ten thousand! And none of these countries had to suffer before that from a single rocket.

"I'm not saying it was wrong to intervene in Kosovo. But please: Don't preach to us about the treatment of civilians."

Damn right. This offensive has been one of the most restrained in human history. Usually when countries invade another, there are thousands upon thousands of deaths. Israel, in spite of Hezbollah has made sure to minimize civilian casualties.

The problem is a matter of perspective, combined with just a general dislike of Israel that has its roots in the vast amounts of anti-semitism around the world before and after World War II.

You call this restraint? Lebanon bombed to hell, a million refugees created and 2/3 of the coastline covered in oil. Real nice.

 

[Aisengard]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Aisengard

Originally posted by: babylon5
I am sure the 20 children buried under the building at Qana would agree how Israel minimize civilian casualties with supposedly precise American made weapon that sent them to heaven.

Israel will never win. It is the green color family in a blue color neighborhood. This war only makes more people angry at them. It's a lost battle for them no matter what.

I'm sure they also loved it when their 'protectors', you know, Hezbollah, put weapons in their basement and let the Israelis know about it so they would have no choice but to bomb it, however, minimising the risk by letting everyone know sometimes days ahead of time, no matter the danger to their own troops by letting Hezbollah know exactly when and where they'd be fighting.

Israel could have done nothing against the rocket attacks and kidnappings of their soldiers, they could have released the proud murderer they put into jail for exchange of the soldiers, as they had many times before. But they didn't. They'd had enough of taking ****** from everyone, and unlike America and Iraq, these people were actually a threat to their nation, publicly stated even, and it's even been stated by the Egyptian guy that they have every right to defend themselves. The ONLY reason civilians are dying is because the UN is taking so long in drafting a resolution. And THEN, when they finally DO draft a resolution it's rejected by Lebanon because it didn't include the complete destruction of Israel.

If a ceace-fire is finally agreed to, and an international force succeeds in disarming Hezbollah and a permanent UN-controlled buffer zone is set up between Israel and everyone, and a lasting peace is finally achieved (starry-eyed hope, I know), we can look back at this and say Israel made the right decision. It'll take time, but when has 1000 accidental civilian deaths over months of bombing civilian/terrorist areas ever been seen as a 'horrible massacre'?

Perspective. Sorry this turned into an off-topic rant.

No, the ONLY reason those people are dead is because the Israelis killed them. If you really believe they are in the right, stop trying to sugar coat it, be honest. If you can't own up to the fact that those people are dead because Israeli bombs landed on their homes...what does that say about what you really believe is going on here?

Speaking of the right decision...what is Israel accomplishing here? At BEST they are dealing a temporary blow to Hezbollah while at the same time very much damaging their already less than great reputation with the rest of the world. I admit, it's a good way to force a UN response...but it seems like there might have been better ways of doing so.

What is the point of blaming Israel for these deaths? Yes they were by Israeli bombs. But also consider that Hezbollah KNOWINGLY hides weapon caches in civilian areas, and they KNOWINGLY wear civilian clothes when fighting Israel, and they KNOWINGLY hide in crowded marketplaces among women and children.

Your thinking is very shallow and self-serving when you say "Israel killed children! Israel killed children!" and nothing else. Israeli bombs headed for military targets landed on children. It's unfortunate, yes, but so is the fact that Hezbollah is a terrorist organization and started this whole damn thing by attacking Israel on Israeli soil for (hopefully) the last time.

Israel will never have a great reputation with the world. As long as Israel maintains an upper hand in the Middle East situation, the rest of the world will always side with the underdog. It is their nature.

And to let you know, there was already a "UN response" in form of a resolution that said, among other things, that Hezbollah MUST DISARM. Guess what didn't happen. I honestly don't think there was a better way, for Israel's sake. Unless you consider the status quo a better way.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Aisengard

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Aisengard

Originally posted by: babylon5
I am sure the 20 children buried under the building at Qana would agree how Israel minimize civilian casualties with supposedly precise American made weapon that sent them to heaven.

Israel will never win. It is the green color family in a blue color neighborhood. This war only makes more people angry at them. It's a lost battle for them no matter what.

I'm sure they also loved it when their 'protectors', you know, Hezbollah, put weapons in their basement and let the Israelis know about it so they would have no choice but to bomb it, however, minimising the risk by letting everyone know sometimes days ahead of time, no matter the danger to their own troops by letting Hezbollah know exactly when and where they'd be fighting.

Israel could have done nothing against the rocket attacks and kidnappings of their soldiers, they could have released the proud murderer they put into jail for exchange of the soldiers, as they had many times before. But they didn't. They'd had enough of taking ****** from everyone, and unlike America and Iraq, these people were actually a threat to their nation, publicly stated even, and it's even been stated by the Egyptian guy that they have every right to defend themselves. The ONLY reason civilians are dying is because the UN is taking so long in drafting a resolution. And THEN, when they finally DO draft a resolution it's rejected by Lebanon because it didn't include the complete destruction of Israel.

If a ceace-fire is finally agreed to, and an international force succeeds in disarming Hezbollah and a permanent UN-controlled buffer zone is set up between Israel and everyone, and a lasting peace is finally achieved (starry-eyed hope, I know), we can look back at this and say Israel made the right decision. It'll take time, but when has 1000 accidental civilian deaths over months of bombing civilian/terrorist areas ever been seen as a 'horrible massacre'?

Perspective. Sorry this turned into an off-topic rant.

No, the ONLY reason those people are dead is because the Israelis killed them. If you really believe they are in the right, stop trying to sugar coat it, be honest. If you can't own up to the fact that those people are dead because Israeli bombs landed on their homes...what does that say about what you really believe is going on here?

Speaking of the right decision...what is Israel accomplishing here? At BEST they are dealing a temporary blow to Hezbollah while at the same time very much damaging their already less than great reputation with the rest of the world. I admit, it's a good way to force a UN response...but it seems like there might have been better ways of doing so.

What is the point of blaming Israel for these deaths? Yes they were by Israeli bombs. But also consider that Hezbollah KNOWINGLY hides weapon caches in civilian areas, and they KNOWINGLY wear civilian clothes when fighting Israel, and they KNOWINGLY hide in crowded marketplaces among women and children.

Your thinking is very shallow and self-serving when you say "Israel killed children! Israel killed children!" and nothing else. Israeli bombs headed for military targets landed on children. It's unfortunate, yes, but so is the fact that Hezbollah is a terrorist organization and started this whole damn thing by attacking Israel on Israeli soil for (hopefully) the last time.

Israel will never have a great reputation with the world. As long as Israel maintains an upper hand in the Middle East situation, the rest of the world will always side with the underdog. It is their nature.

And to let you know, there was already a "UN response" in form of a resolution that said, among other things, that Hezbollah MUST DISARM. Guess what didn't happen. I honestly don't think there was a better way, for Israel's sake. Unless you consider the status quo a better way.

Believe me, my objective here isn't to be as anti-Israeli as possible. I just think you people are WAY too eager to whitewash the bad things going on there unless you can somehow blame Hezbollah for it. Yeah, a lot of it IS their fault, and they deserve what they are getting. But the random people caught in the crossfire don't deserve what's happening. And quite frankly, I don't think we have enough details to say for sure that Israel is doing all it can to limit civilian deaths. Hezbollah deserves the lion's share of the blame for what's going on, but I'm not sure Israel deserves to get off totally innocent here.

 

[IrateLeaf]

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: ThePresence
I saw Netanyahu on CNN International. The anchor asked him about Human Rights Watch's assertion that Israel committed 'war crimes'. He said that according to HRW Winston Churchill must've been the biggest war criminal of all time because he responded to the rocketing of London with bombing Germany. Indiscriminately. Killing hundreds of thousands of German civillians.

This kind of reasoning is dangerous. For example, the United States place thousands Japanese into internment camps. Does that mean its okay to do it now?

that kind of reasoning is accurate and factual. Nothing dangerous about that.
For example, the United States place thousands Japanese into internment camps. Does that mean its okay to do it now?

As my friend Thepresence stated -- That's a bad comparison. Most people today recognize the problem with what the US did, and it's dubious success and it's not hailed as a great achievment. Churchill's response to the V2 attacks is.

 

[IrateLeaf]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Olmert is grasping at air.

At first they were going to 'destroy' Hezbollah.

Then they were going to greatly diminish Hezbollah.

Then they were going to create a security zone until a 'robust' multinational force arrives.

Olmert/Israel screwed the pooch on this one. It was a bad situation that they've made worse.

Thats what I like about your posts. They always assume thiungs that just are not so.
Israel knew they were not going to destroy hezbollah!
Israel will greatly diminish Hezbollahs effectiveness. or if nothing else make Hezbollah think twice before snatching people.
YES!! Israel is in the process as we speak of establishing a security zone. Which the Un will need to occupy immediately after Israel withdraws.
lastly its people like you who make statements without supporting them whatsoever.

I donot see at all where Olmert screwed up. Enlighten me using links and such..please.
Even hezbollah said they(Hezbollah) screwed up in under estimating what Israel`s response would be.