Olmert tells Europe to stop preaching to Israel

[fallenangel99]

Israel will greatly diminish Hezbollahs effectiveness.

20 some days after the war started, Hizbollah is still shooting 100+ rockets a day. Sorry, I doubt their effectiveness has been greatly diminished. Oh, for two days it only shot 40 somerockets and that is because they accepted the 48-hour cease-fire offered by the Israelis, which the Israelis did not follow.

Both sides are trying to inflict max damage before a truce treaty or whatever is accepted by the Israelis. Nasrallah has a cult status in the Arab world. He is going to get a lot of sympathy, and I'm sure he won't have any trouble re-supplying his men.

Israel has no choice but to respect Hizbollah and what it's capable of. I am not sure how much the buffer zone is really going to help. Remember, the rockets can be easily hidden. If they are shot again (when the U.N./NATO is policing S.Lebanon), who is going to retaliate against Hizbollah? Israel? or will U.N./NATO chase Hizbollah? What if Israel accidentaly kills NATO troops?

And I highly doubt Hizbollah is going to accept any peace plan unless Lebanese/Arab prisoners are released from Israeli Jails.

On the topic of prisoners.. how did Israel round them up? did they get trial? Is this another Guantenamo? I'm not sure the history of Arab/Palestine/Lebanese prisoners in Israel

Here are some good reads, rather than reading some pro-Jewish stuff:

A Disciplined Hezbollah Surprises Israel With Its Training, Tactics and Weapons:

Text

Arab World Finds Icon in Leader of Hezbollah:

Text

 

[Dari]

I guess Olmert is saying that since Europeans slaughtered millions of Jews and killed tens of thousands of Kosovars, she has no right to criticize Israel for slaughtering a thousand Arabs (so far) and making a million homeless? And in the same breath, Olmert will listen to America, which has slaughtered more human beings than any other country within the past 100 years, if ever.

Well, I guess Olmert can choose his heroes and villians as he likes. Whatever floats his boat, I guess. At the end of the day, it makes no difference, I guess. All parties have thick, hot blood on their hand and none of them can claim to be better than the other.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Originally posted by: 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.

Olmert shooting from the hip on July 18th

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert addressed the Knesset and the world Monday evening, saying "Enough!" and promising to fight until the threats of Hamas and Hizbullah have been completely obliterated.
---
In a reiteration of his refusal to negotiate with Hizbullah or Hamas prior to the release of the kidnapped soldiers, Olmert said: "It is of regional and international interest to control and dismantle the terror organizations and remove this threat from the Middle East. We intend to do so."
---
Opposite the Palestinians we will fight until terrorism ceases, Gilad Shalit is brought home and the Kassam rockets stop," Olmert said. "We will attack every terrorist staging area, destroy every terrorist base and liquidate members of the terror groups.

Maybe Olmert studied at the Bush/Rumsfeld School of Not in the Ballpark . . . regardless that sounds like a call to end Hezbollah's reign in southern Lebanon.

Any reasonable observant probably believes the primary rationale for Bush (and to a certain extent Blair) support for the Israeli offensive was a 'hope' that Israel really could lay a haymaker on Hezbollah. While its fair to say Hezbollah misjudged the Israeli response, Israel/Bush/Blair clearly misjudged Hezbollah's capabilities.

While its certainly reasonable to believe IDF has diminished some of Hezbollah's offensive capabilities, the offensive has also decimated Lebanon's civilian infrastructure, economy, and what little bit of goodwill existed from the perspective of Lebanese civilians.

What will fill the vacuum? My guess is that Hezbollah will fill it. It's also likely that unless some serious diplomatic intelligence/capability miraculously appears from Bolton/Rice/Cheney/Bush . . . Syria and Iran will replenish Hezbollah funds and arms. And the Israeli offensive will do wonders for Hezbollah recruitment.

Uh, what UN force is going to fill that security zone? The US won't send troops. The British won't send troops. The French might send troops but they've made it clear they will NOT go if they are expected to fight Hezbollah. The EU doesn't have an military. NATO has its hands full in Afghanistan. And no one is seriously considering a blue helmet force.

There's essentially no expectation over the next month or even two months that IDF can withdraw from Lebanon. Israel is being drawn into an open-ended occupation of southern Lebanon. I don't think that's what Olmert wanted.

 

[piasabird]

Assuming the lebanese are innocent people caught in the middle is a mistatke. It is estimated that at least half of the Lebanese are Hezbolah supporters. The Lebanese are complicit with what is going on in Lebanon. They and the UN did nothing to disarm or get rid of the Hezbolah, because they hate Isreal in favory of the Muslim Terrorists.

If you make your bed, be prepared to die in it. Is there anything such as an innocent civilian? Koffee Ahnan was responsible for disarming and securing the southern Lebanese border. Koffee Ahnan is responsible for their deaths.

 

[Lemon law]

Originally posted by: piasabird
Assuming the lebanese are innocent people caught in the middle is a mistatke. It is estimated that at least half of the Lebanese are Hezbolah supporters. The Lebanese are complicit with what is going on in Lebanon. They and the UN did nothing to disarm or get rid of the Hezbolah, because they hate Isreal in favory of the Muslim Terrorists.

If you make your bed, be prepared to die in it. Is there anything such as an innocent civilian? Koffee Ahnan was responsible for disarming and securing the southern Lebanese border. Koffee Ahnan is responsible for their deaths.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well piasbird,

Lets say that 50% of the Lebanese people support Hezbollah---which means 50% do not.
Can you now tell me Israel is just killing civilians that support Hezbollah and sparing those who do not.----and the clear answer is that they are killing everyone indiscriminately---including children just a few days old.---which is called collective punishment---and a war crime. But if you want a more accurate guess---25% of the Lebanese were somewhat favorable to Hezbollah---but still did nothing to aid them----now 75 % of the Lebanese support Hezbollah and will probably actively aid them in the future. When the same thing could be said of the larger arab world----its can only be called counter productive on Israel's part.

But even granting Israel's right to self defense----the attacks are coming from only a narrow strip in Southern Lebanon.----------and Israel may have a right to take action to remove the threat in this area. When they stray one inch North of the launching zones
they lose that right--------nor am I splitting hairs---we are not talking inches---or mere miles-----we are talking hundreds of miles.---all of the city of Beruit is not even close to
being a threat to Israel.

And if we want to talk about who created Hezbollah---Israel did in its brutal occupation of Lebanon---from 1982 to 2000. And the Lebanese government is still a basket case---and Israel now expects it to police Hezbollah?------and now thanks to Israel---hezbollah will have even greater freedom to move about Lebanon free from any Lebanese governmental policing.---------and Israel is really engaing in some long term strategic thinking???????---------------wrong----------get a clue-------it backfired big time on Israel.

In coming months I think even the Israelie people will also come to that more sober realization------and hopefully shed some its self-delusions made posssible by a superior military-----and start looking at its own sins also.

Because no amounts of wrong moves by both sides will add up to a right---it only drives mutual hatreds higher.

 

[Jhhnn]

Heh. The brainwashing is obvious in this thread. Maybe some of Israel's fanbois can tell us how attacking Beirut's airport and Lebanon's infrastructure will prevent Hezbollah rocket attacks... How attacking targets in Beirut's northern Christian neighborhoods will do the same...

Or how some semi-mythical international force will prevent Hezbollah from moving back into their own villages once the Israelis withdraw...

Silly people- the Israelis have no intention of withdrawing, ever. All the rhetoric from them and the Bushistas is simply cover for that fact. It's all part of the plan for Greater Israel... The basic plan is to pound the Lebanese so hard that they'll allow the Israelis whatever they want in order to quit... very straightforward, naked aggression under the pretext of "self defense".

Forcing Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon was just to pave the way for the current aggression...

 

[Doboji]

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.

You're right... Israel shouldn't have done anything except release the Lebanese prisoners who murdered countless Israeli civillians... and Israel should withdraw from Sheba... and Gaza, and the West Bank and the Golan Heights... and then when the missles fall on schools and synagogues and homes, they should ignore them. And the United States should withdraw it's support from Israel... and Israel should disarm... and welcome the Palestinians into Tel Aviv... and then convert to Islam or pay the jizya...

 

[Doboji]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Heh. The brainwashing is obvious in this thread. Maybe some of Israel's fanbois can tell us how attacking Beirut's airport and Lebanon's infrastructure will prevent Hezbollah rocket attacks... How attacking targets in Beirut's northern Christian neighborhoods will do the same...

Or how some semi-mythical international force will prevent Hezbollah from moving back into their own villages once the Israelis withdraw...

Silly people- the Israelis have no intention of withdrawing, ever. All the rhetoric from them and the Bushistas is simply cover for that fact. It's all part of the plan for Greater Israel... The basic plan is to pound the Lebanese so hard that they'll allow the Israelis whatever they want in order to quit... very straightforward, naked aggression under the pretext of "self defense".

Forcing Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon was just to pave the way for the current aggression...

Greater Israel? You think the Israelis want "Greater Israel" are you out of your mind? Have you ever met an Israeli?

 

[Genx87]

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.

Keep dreaming, they will find somebody new to fight.

Israel goes down and it just may end up being your backyard.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: 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.

I could show you pictures of Dresden or Nagasaki if you wish. Comparatively speaking the Israeli's in a war are being very restraint.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: 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.

I could show you pictures of Dresden or Nagasaki if you wish. Comparatively speaking the Israeli's in a war are being very restraint.

Why not toss in some pix of Darfur, Choeung Ek, My Lai, or Nanjing while you are at it?

 

[fornax]

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.

You are very mistaken. Israel is very much like Kosovo, and no one understood that better than Sharon. He was a dedicated supporter of Milosevic and went to Yugoslavia to show his support. He plainly said (and while I despise him as a war criminal, he was right) that Europe and NATO are setting a dangerous precedent. In 10-20 years, when Israeli arabs become the majority (even in part of Israel), the Kosovo scenario might very well develop there. Keep in mind that Israel is racist state with a well developed apartheid system, and probably the only state in the world today that OPENLY declares its desire to remain racially pure (there are many other states that covet that covertly).

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: rchiu
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.

Yeah, what is with the comparison to Kosovo? In what way does Israeli's actacks on Lebanon show restraint compared to what NATO did in Kosovo?

 

[fornax]

Originally posted by: ThePresence
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.

Utter and unadultarated BS. Just because it was Churchill who did it, doesn't make it automatically right. Sir Winston Churchill and Sir Arthur "Bomber" Harris (together with our illustrious president of that time) are war criminals, and the only reason they were not hanged as many Germans were, was that they were among the winners. The firebombing of Dresden and Tokio served no military purpose whatsoever.

 

[IrateLeaf]

Originally posted by: fornax

Originally posted by: ThePresence
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.

Utter and unadultarated BS. Just because it was Churchill who did it, doesn't make it automatically right. Sir Winston Churchill and Sir Arthur "Bomber" Harris (together with our illustrious president of that time) are war criminals, and the only reason they were not hanged as many Germans were, was that they were among the winners. The firebombing of Dresden and Tokio served no military purpose whatsoever.

Is that all you have to offer is your what if theories?
of course history is written by the winners.
So what would you call the V2 attacks? Justified? Churchill was a genuis and proved it by his response to the V2 attacks.
How can you p[ossibly rationalize that during ww2 our president as well as Churchill and Sir Harris were war criminals? There is noway to rationalize that. Just like when you go out to win a war. You go out to win. There is no such thing as a fair war. There is no such thing as a war where just the soldiers get killed with no civilian casualties.
I would still like to knopw your rationale behind your statement-- Sir Winston Churchill and Sir Arthur "Bomber" Harris (together with our illustrious president of that time) are war criminals, --- this ought to be good....please explain

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Doboji

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.

You're right... Israel shouldn't have done anything except release the Lebanese prisoners who murdered countless Israeli civillians... and Israel should withdraw from Sheba... and Gaza, and the West Bank and the Golan Heights... and then when the missles fall on schools and synagogues and homes, they should ignore them. And the United States should withdraw it's support from Israel... and Israel should disarm... and welcome the Palestinians into Tel Aviv... and then convert to Islam or pay the jizya...

Those aren't the only two options there, chief. Think harder.

 

[Jhhnn]

From Doboji-

Greater Israel? You think the Israelis want "Greater Israel" are you out of your mind? Have you ever met an Israeli?

In 1919, Ben Gurion proposed that the northern border of the Jewish mandate in Palestine should be the Litani river- check your map, that is portion of Lebanon is where the current invasion is taking place...

They took most of the pre-1967 state of Israel at gunpoint in 1948, the Golan and the Shebaa farms the same way, and are pushing the westbank pals into a modern day version of the Warsaw ghetto in pursuit of a policy of Lebensraum and apartheid...

If you want to know what they're doing, then look at what they're doing, nevermind what they're saying... With the exception of returning the Sinai to Egypt, they've traded security for territory every chance they could... and giving back the Sinai was no big deal, it's one of the most barren bits of stinkin' desert this side of Mars...

And, yeh, I've met a few Israelis over the years, some of whom would simply gas the Pals if they thought they could get away with it... the only thing they learned from the Holocaust is to do unto others before they do unto you, and to exploit a massive American guilt trip over those events...

I'll keep asking that same question nobody wants to answer- how would we feel about the Israelis if they weren't Jewish?

Anybody who thinks we'd feel the same has been rather effectively propagandized, imho... and ruthlessly exploited, as well...

 

[Lemon law]

What these current posts in this thread now amount to is a totally falacious arguement---namely saying the other side is engaged wrongdoing---and therefore the other side is right.

When the reality is that two wrongs don't make a right----and all we have is an endless cycle of pointless violence---with neither side right---and both sides deeply in the wrong.

Both have been deeply in the wrong since day one----and driving the hatreds higher is all the current crisis is doing---with the terrorists now winning the day---because any voice of moderation is driven out on both sides.

When such a dispute happens in a community between indivuals---courts are called in---and ultimately the courts impose a settlement.

And the parties damn well better abide by it---and now the world community is such a court---and its time for cooler and less emotionally involved people to come to a fair solution.

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: IrateLeaf

Originally posted by: fornax

Originally posted by: ThePresence
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.

Utter and unadultarated BS. Just because it was Churchill who did it, doesn't make it automatically right. Sir Winston Churchill and Sir Arthur "Bomber" Harris (together with our illustrious president of that time) are war criminals, and the only reason they were not hanged as many Germans were, was that they were among the winners. The firebombing of Dresden and Tokio served no military purpose whatsoever.

Is that all you have to offer is your what if theories?
of course history is written by the winners.
So what would you call the V2 attacks? Justified? Churchill was a genuis and proved it by his response to the V2 attacks.
How can you p[ossibly rationalize that during ww2 our president as well as Churchill and Sir Harris were war criminals? There is noway to rationalize that. Just like when you go out to win a war. You go out to win. There is no such thing as a fair war. There is no such thing as a war where just the soldiers get killed with no civilian casualties.
I would still like to knopw your rationale behind your statement-- Sir Winston Churchill and Sir Arthur "Bomber" Harris (together with our illustrious president of that time) are war criminals, --- this ought to be good....please explain

I see you are still posting BS trying to justify Israeli war crime with something totally different eh?

This is as simple as I can put it, hope even you can understand.

UK -> Germany -> Declared War
Israel -> Hezbollah -> Declared War
Israel -> Lebanon -> Did not Declare War
Israel killing Lebanese civilian -> War Crime

Get it?

 

[IrateLeaf]

rchiu---I see you are still posting BS trying to justify Israeli war crime with something totally different eh?

This is as simple as I can put it, hope even you can understand.

UK -> Germany -> Declared War
Israel -> Hezbollah -> Declared War
Israel -> Lebanon -> Did not Declare War
Israel killing Lebanese civilian -> War Crime

Get it?

UK -> Germany -> Declared War
Israel -> Hezbollah -> Declared War
lebanese Goverment - hezbollah -> niether care about the lebanese or palestinian people
Hezbollah -> Lebanon -> use lebanese women and children as human sheilds.
Israel killing going after hezbollah Fighters cowering behind women and children -> priceless!!!!


Its okay to call what you don`t understand terrorism.
Yet I do understand the Arabs and hezbollah. What i don`t understand is why they feel the need to cower behind women and children?
Quite possibly another kodak moment!

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: IrateLeaf

rchiu---I see you are still posting BS trying to justify Israeli war crime with something totally different eh?

This is as simple as I can put it, hope even you can understand.

UK -> Germany -> Declared War
Israel -> Hezbollah -> Declared War
Israel -> Lebanon -> Did not Declare War
Israel killing Lebanese civilian -> War Crime

Get it?

UK -> Germany -> Declared War
Israel -> Hezbollah -> Declared War
lebanese Goverment - hezbollah -> niether care about the lebanese or palestinian people
Hezbollah -> Lebanon -> use lebanese women and children as human sheilds.
Israel killing going after hezbollah Fighters cowering behind women and children -> priceless!!!!


Its okay to call what you don`t understand terrorism.
Yet I do understand the Arabs and hezbollah. What i don`t understand is why they feel the need to cower behind women and children?
Quite possibly another kodak moment!

heh, I see you got nothing to say about comparing Isreal to UK and you have to bring up other topic to justify Israel war crime.

And your post pretty much speak for itself, how Israel killing women and children are priceless and how it is kodak moment. There is really no need for me to give more evidence on how disguesting you people are and how you people completely disregard Arab's life. Your post already says enough.

 

[senseamp]

Olmert does have a point that bombing Kosovo was a travesty and a double standard, but he shouldn't forget who was the main perpetrator of that bombing and not just single out the Europeans.

 

[ManSnake]

All you jew lovers should move to israel.
All you arab lovers should move to the middle east.
Americans need America lovers. If you are not one, then please get out!

 

[Aisengard]

Originally posted by: ManSnake
All you jew lovers should move to israel.
All you arab lovers should move to the middle east.
Americans need America lovers. If you are not one, then please get out!

Okay, please get out.

 

[Lemon law]

Lets do a quick review here---pop quiz---the title of this thread---ans is "Olmert tells Europe to stop preaching to Israel."---translation--we will not listen to you or your concerns.

Quite sad really----as the refuse to listen is the critical step in total political isolation for Israel.---which is just another form of self-delusion and denial.

You can bet the other sides are talking, listening, cajoling, and manuvering---------while Israel is off somewhere in diplomatic la la land.--lost in its own delusions of imunity.