Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 8/4/06 08:37 PM, frycook wrote: \you don't defend with killing civilians smartass

Wait, that seems to be what Israel is incidently causing.

"Previous estimates have put Lebanon's death toll between 500 and 700."

"Israel's death toll in the conflict rose to 62, including 24 civilians, after new Hezbollah attacks."

Source.

As in you attack us, we attack you.

in "we" you mean your'e part of hezbolla?

Israel is retaliating for the attacks by Hezbollah. Hezbollah is retaliating for Israel's attacks.

Otherwise known as a battle.

Continued. . .

This is not only about the soldiers and the rockets, this is about stopping them once and for all.

Congratulations, your violence in the past failed and it is failing miserably now. Great plan.

This won't stop any progress which was made in the Arab world, this is actually the first time three Arab countries have spoked in the favour of Israel.

You mean Jordan or Egypt? Turkey? Saudia Arabia? Iraq? Keep living in your fantasy world. They condemned Hezbollah then Israel pushed them away with their actions.

Point?

Israel hasnt changed their tactics in 60 years of existence. Which is why they still have the same problems.

Our generals know the Hezbollah for a long time now and they know the way they act.

And??? That is a loss if they have "kept fighting" the same group for decades in any book. Its a loss because it is not a win. Israel has to destroy insurgencies to win. All Hezbollah has to do is survive. And so far, Hamas is still around, Fatah is still around, Palestine still supports their terrorists, Lebanon still supports their terrorists, and the entire Arab world still hates Israel. That is a loss in any strategists book.

You keep doing the same tired crap and it has gotten nowhere. Just because you have experience at losing doesnt mean you have positive experience to build on.

At 8/4/06 07:36 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote: A government should protect it's citizens, even if that means targeting other citizens.

Thats exactly what he said. You cant have your cake and eat it, Lidov. You are asking everything and giving nothing. You are telling them to act a certain way then exempting Israel from that same action. You cant have your cake and eat it.

At 8/4/06 08:47 PM, FAB0L0US wrote: Congratulations, your violence in the past failed and it is failing miserably now. Great plan.

When both sides are set on entirely eradicating the other... do you see a peaceful solution?

Other than that... I agree with everything you've said.

At 8/4/06 08:46 PM, RedScorpion wrote:

At 8/4/06 08:37 PM, frycook wrote: \you don't defend with killing civilians smartass

Wait, that seems to be what Israel is incidently causing.

Blame hezbolla for firing rockets at israel and then running like pussies to the nearest civilian populated building.

"Previous estimates have put Lebanon's death toll between 500 and 700."

that's true, but what are you trying to say?

"Israel's death toll in the conflict rose to 62, including 24 civilians, after new Hezbollah attacks."

Source.

As in you attack us, we attack you.

in "we" you mean your'e part of hezbolla?

Israel is retaliating for the attacks by Hezbollah. Hezbollah is retaliating for Israel's attacks.

Israel is attacking hezbolla.

Otherwise known as a battle.

a battle is when two opposing sides attack each other.
Israel is attacking Israel and hezbolla is attacking civilians also known as terrorism.
hezbolla is breaking every single international law about war. they are not in uniform, they use civilian structures to fire rockets. if they did'nt there would'nt be any dead lebanese

At 8/4/06 08:29 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:

At 8/4/06 08:04 PM, Dragon_Smaug wrote:

At 8/4/06 07:29 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:

At 8/4/06 07:22 PM, Lidov wrote:

At 8/4/06 03:58 PM, LavaTemplar wrote:

No, because those missiles were not intended to save lives, but to destroy them.

And your missles aren't.

Hey wait 500+ Lebanese have died, it's clearly not your missles, they save lives.

You understand what I’m trying to say, don’t you? Do I have to spell it out.

Hezbollah missiles: Targetting civilians/everyone/anything, trying to kill as many civilians as possible, not in response to threat to Lebanese.

Israel missiles: Targetting Hezbollah, in response to direct threat, hoping to damage Hezbollah to reduce their CAPACITY TO HARM Israel, accidentally hit Lebanese civilians.

Now, do you understand what I am saying? Regardless of their effectiveness, don’t you see the difference? I don’t believe you don’t.

Hezbollah is not the government, and it endangers, not protects, the Lebanese by shooting missiles.

Hezbollah has seats in the Parliment.

Fine, then are you saying its an act of war by the government? Even better, Lebanon is lucky Israel is only targeting the party that carried out the attack and not the whole government.

More missles have been fired at Isreal since they attacked Lebanon, how do we know that some of these are defense missles.

As in you attack us, we attack you.

Because Hezbollah is firing from civilian areas, knowing that areas fired from will be hit. Also, Hezbollah is not trying to hit things that endanger anyone, they fire their rockets hoping to hit people of any kind.

At 8/4/06 08:42 PM, FAB0L0US wrote:

At 8/4/06 07:17 PM, Lidov wrote: I never said that diplomacy was tried, as I said before, talking to the Hezbollah will end up with us releasing 20 prisoners and another kidnapping a few months after.

Strawman. I never said Israel should compromise with Hezbollah. They should try diplomacy with Lebanon, you know, the place Israel is bombing the shit out of that had no part in Hezbollahs actios.

You said yourself Lebanon had no power over Hezbollah. Had Israel tried diplomacy with Lebanon, there would have been no results, just the events happening now pushed forward a day.

Yes, because when some of your buildings are bombed you can't at all try to talk to Israel.

Excuse me? You want them to make concessions to Israel when Israel wont even stop bombing their country to let the talks proceed?

What is to talk about? Either they give in or die, you don’t negotiate with terrorists.

At 8/4/06 08:47 PM, FAB0L0US wrote: Congratulations, your violence in the past failed and it is failing miserably now. Great plan.

Lot’s of Hezbollah’s capabilities have been destroyed. Maybe Isreal isn’t clearly winning yet, but they are far, far, from “failing.”

Israel hasnt changed their tactics in 60 years of existence. Which is why they still have the same problems.

Negotiation, land giving, fighting, prisoner exchanges, more. What tactics have they not tried?

At 8/4/06 09:07 PM, Dragon_Smaug wrote: You said yourself Lebanon had no power over Hezbollah. Had Israel tried diplomacy with Lebanon, there would have been no results, just the events happening now pushed forward a day.

This instance would have given Lebanon a chance to unite their country against Hezbollah, showing how evil they are. They could have made the case Hezbollah tried to draw them into a war and said the Israelis are showing restraint and are not attacking us out of their good will. That actions could have very easily backfired for Hezbollah if Israel showed any restraint at all.

I am not saying Lebanon would have accepted, but I believe they would have. Siniora seems resonable. And Israel would have pre-empted the bulk of the worlds criticism even if the diplomacy failed. It wasnt attempted and things have spun dangerously out of control. The incursion may gain short term goals but it failed. Terribly. Hezbollah is going nowhere as long as their ideals are strong in the hearts of the Lebanese.

What is to talk about? Either they give in or die, you don’t negotiate with terrorists.

Lebanons a terrorist now?

Lot’s of Hezbollah’s capabilities have been destroyed. Maybe Isreal isn’t clearly winning yet, but they are far, far, from “failing.”

I am sure the same argument is being made in Iraq with Americas occupation there. You tell me if we are winning.

Negotiation, land giving, fighting, prisoner exchanges, more. What tactics have they not tried?

Negotiation: canceled after Yasser Arafat pleaded for Barak to come back to the negotiating table at Taba.
Land Giving: withdrew from Palestinian land while they had no strong police or armed forces to take over after the IDF left. Anarchy ensued.
Fighting: Whats need saying?
Prisoner Exchanges: Dont care for this one myself. Solves nothing.

Israel has never seriosly tried undermining the PA to make life more bearable for the Palestinians and reducing the disorder and chaos and giving the Palestinains more options to lead a real life. Negotiations were never allowed to draw to their conclusion. And the land giving was half assed at best and completly self serving. They didnt want to deal with Palestines shit so they left. There is a reason after all why it is a "unilateral" disengagement plan. They didnt talk or ask or deal with the PA in the matter.

Israel couldn't get peace after Oslo, or after 1947, or after 1967, or after 1973 or, hell, after 2000 or EVEN AFTER the GAZA PULLOUT.

Israel WILL NOT GET PEACE if it seems weak and makes concessions. That's historical fact. Israel needs to fight for peace and make sure it's secure- that is the fundamental right of EVERY STATE.

Ah, and when you have missiles right north or south of you, medium range ballistic missiles, you tend to solve it. The military men during the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis were pushing for attacking, but, naturally, they lost. This time, their attack strategy would WORK. ANY NATION WITH ENEMIES THAT CAN STRIKE IT HAS THE RIGHT TO PROTECT ITSELF, assuming that the enemy is starting or building up their defenses. Gotta try diplomacy first, but if you need to, you have to protect yourself. Israel is DEFENDING itself.

At 8/4/06 09:27 PM, FAB0L0US wrote:

At 8/4/06 09:07 PM, Dragon_Smaug wrote: You said yourself Lebanon had no power over Hezbollah. Had Israel tried diplomacy with Lebanon, there would have been no results, just the events happening now pushed forward a day.

This instance would have given Lebanon a chance to unite their country against Hezbollah, showing how evil they are. They could have made the case Hezbollah tried to draw them into a war and said the Israelis are showing restraint and are not attacking us out of their good will. That actions could have very easily backfired for Hezbollah if Israel showed any restraint at all.

That is true. Israel chose to take the quick action route instead, but your option may have been a better one in hindsight. I still think that nothing would have come of it, though. I could be wrong, however. We will never know.

I am not saying Lebanon would have accepted, but I believe they would have. Siniora seems resonable. And Israel would have pre-empted the bulk of the worlds criticism even if the diplomacy failed. It wasnt attempted and things have spun dangerously out of control. The incursion may gain short term goals but it failed. Terribly. Hezbollah is going nowhere as long as their ideals are strong in the hearts of the Lebanese.

I think Israel should have tried diplomacy for a day just to stop the world from saying it should have tried it.

What is to talk about? Either they give in or die, you don’t negotiate with terrorists.

Lebanons a terrorist now?

No, Hezbollah is. You don’t negotiate with Hezbollah, and Lebanon has no real chips with which to negotiate.

Lot’s of Hezbollah’s capabilities have been destroyed. Maybe Isreal isn’t clearly winning yet, but they are far, far, from “failing.”

I am sure the same argument is being made in Iraq with Americas occupation there. You tell me if we are winning.

In Iraq? That is totally different. My opinion on that situation has no bearing on this thread, and if I want to debate that topic I will find an Iraq thread.

Negotiation, land giving, fighting, prisoner exchanges, more. What tactics have they not tried?

Negotiation: canceled after Yasser Arafat pleaded for Barak to come back to the negotiating table at Taba.
Land Giving: withdrew from Palestinian land while they had no strong police or armed forces to take over after the IDF left. Anarchy ensued.
Fighting: Whats need saying?
Prisoner Exchanges: Dont care for this one myself. Solves nothing.

So you agree that you are wrong? You said they have been trying the same tactics for 60 years, I’m saying they’ve tried every tactic. There is no perfect tactic when fighting terrorists.

So what you guys are saying is that because Hezbollah is a Lebanese terrorist group, all of Lebanon should be blamed for their actions and the civilians' lives shouldn't be spared.

That's like saying that all of Afghanistan was responsible for the actions of the Taliban, therefore we should have spared none of them if they were near one of the Taliban members.

And Iraqi insurgents operate in the same ways as Hezbollah. So why don't we bomb every neighborhood where an insurgent might live? You never know with those guys.

Shit, even the US has better policies than Israel. That's pathetic.

Israel needs to stop being a bunch of self-righteous freaks and think of others for once. Sure, they got whiped out in the Holocaust, and that was horrible, but that was 60 years ago. Stop whining about it and move on.

AND HELL, MAYBE ISRAEL SHOULDN'T HAVE TAKEN THE GAZA STRIP IN THE FIRST PLACE

Is it just me or do ISrael's military casualties outnumber the civilian death toll while Lebanese civilians outnumber Lebanese soliders and Hezbollha by liek 4 to 1?

I know Israel keep ssaying they are doing their best to avoid civilian deaths and that Hezbollah is purposely targeting civilians, but numbers don't lie.

And as Sean Connery said in the Rock

Your best. Losers always whine about their best. Winners go home and fuck the prom queen.

Take a look in my sig. Those are facts reported by Lebonese officials.

At 8/4/06 10:47 PM, Dragon_Smaug wrote: So you agree that you are wrong? You said they have been trying the same tactics for 60 years, I’m saying they’ve tried every tactic. There is no perfect tactic when fighting terrorists.

Let me rephrase. They have tried all the wrong tactics and kept doing them over and over agian for decades. Especially the violence one.

And they have tried many tactics (I phrased wrong) but they have never changed their strategy. It has always been trying to combat terrorism, the tactic, instead of the causes of terrorism.

At 8/5/06 03:09 AM, FAB0L0US wrote: It has always been trying to combat terrorism, the tactic, instead of the causes of terrorism.

And what if the cause of terrorism is the mere existence of Israel?
Israel won't destroy itself.

Another possible cause is the misinterpretation of the Koran. How can that be fought?

At 8/4/06 08:42 PM, FAB0L0US wrote: In 1982? During the 80's when they still had a Civil War raging? During Syrian and Israeli occupation of their country? When Syria controlled their government because of the instability after the Israeli incursion and subsequent Civil War funded and supported by foreign powers? When they still were to poor and weak to conqueor a still powerful Hezbollah with no provocation in the past year or two? When exactly was your suggested time to reign in Hezbollah?

All of these excuses are pretty dumb actually, the fact that your country is weak doesn't mean it doesn't need to take care of what happens in their territory. I was actually talking about after we left Lebanon, in the year 2,000, they shouldn't have let all of the rockets reach the Hezbollah. They shouldn't have let the Hezbollah build the underground bases, they should have called for an international force to help them do it. Believe me, the UN would have been very happy to see an Arab country asking for help in cleaning it's territory from terror, so as USA, France and many more.

At 8/5/06 07:13 AM, Lidov wrote: so as USA, France and many more.

No France doesn't help people. They let them rot.

At 8/5/06 07:13 AM, Lidov wrote: They shouldn't have let the Hezbollah build the underground bases, they should have called for an international force to help them do it. Believe me, the UN would have been very happy to see an Arab country asking for help in cleaning it's territory from terror, so as USA, France and many more.

So you say that this gives you right to attack Lebanon and murder innocent civilians?

Oh, ok then.. Israel supported PKK for many years (gave them weapons,tranied them in camps etc..).. I guess this gives us (Turkey) the right to bomb the shit out of Israel and rape every each citizen including you..

No, because those missiles were not intended to save lives, but to destroy them.

What so it makes Israel he right becuase the missile intended to save lives? HAHAHAHAHAHA so I guess you are saving the lives of all those inocent lebanonese when you kill them with your missile.

And now Israel has destroyed all ways for humanitarian supplies to reach Lebanon. There is no way to get in or out of the country now that Israel has bombed highways and bridges. What is Israel trying to do, starve the whole country? Stop the innocents they're slaughtering from getting aid, even though they claim to not be targeting them?

I do believe Israel did it with the intention of stopping the weapons from coming in from Syria, but it was a foolish decision. Now the Lebanese are trapped.

Israel... STOP BEING SO IMPULSIVE!

At 8/5/06 06:56 AM, Dzex wrote: And what if the cause of terrorism is the mere existence of Israel?
Israel won't destroy itself.

Thats not the cause. Its a convenient excuse. The cause is weak governments, instability, terrible economy, harsh enviromental conditions, lack of governmental institutions, etc. The only thing Israel manages to do about this is exacerbate it most of the time.

Another possible cause is the misinterpretation of the Koran. How can that be fought?

Education. And I am not saying you can do it everywhere but I dont see anyone even TRYING.

Forgot this.

At 8/5/06 07:13 AM, Lidov wrote: All of these excuses are pretty dumb actually, the fact that your country is weak doesn't mean it doesn't need to take care of what happens in their territory.

Like I said, keep living in your fantasy world where left is right and up is down. You ignore what people in Lebanon say and are equating "What should have been done" with "Reality." I am sure the central government of Somalia should have kept control of their warlords. THEY COULDNT. I am sure the central government of Iraq shouldnt let terrorism happen. THEY CANT. I am sure the central government of Afghanistan should be invaded for making and selling illegal drugs. THEY DONT HAVE CONTROL OUTSIDE OF KABUL.

You want to keep making up fantasy to help you sleep better, go for it. But dont pretend there is a single ounce of truth behind that fantasy.

Lebanon and their people needed help, not collective punishment and what amounts to ethnic cleansing of southern Lebanon.

At 8/5/06 02:42 PM, FAB0L0US wrote:

At 8/5/06 06:56 AM, Dzex wrote: And what if the cause of terrorism is the mere existence of Israel?
Israel won't destroy itself.

Thats not the cause. Its a convenient excuse. The cause is weak governments, instability, terrible economy, harsh enviromental conditions, lack of governmental institutions, etc. The only thing Israel manages to do about this is exacerbate it most of the time.

Another possible cause is the misinterpretation of the Koran. How can that be fought?

Education. And I am not saying you can do it everywhere but I dont see anyone even TRYING.

Another, and probably the main, cause of terrorism is hatred of western culture. That's why you find terrorist groups with agendas against western nations (most notably the united states).

Israel technically is a cause of terrorism because they have caused so much violence and anger in the middle east which provokes people into resorting to violence. Also, it's a symbol of the meddling of the west, as western countries tend to support Israel and are the ones who supported its existence.

And as I have said before, the Islamic Brotherhood, the first Islamic group that resorted to violence to achieve their goals, was founded due to England's great influence on Egyptian culture and affairs. They drove the English out and have continued to violently oppose western meddling.

At 8/5/06 02:42 PM, FAB0L0US wrote:

At 8/5/06 06:56 AM, Dzex wrote: Another possible cause is the misinterpretation of the Koran. How can that be fought?

Education. And I am not saying you can do it everywhere but I dont see anyone even TRYING.

The reformation of Iraq is a first step. That's trying.

Can you suggest a way, to educate your enemies, that doesn't invlove any physical arm twisting?

At 8/5/06 03:51 PM, Dzex wrote: Can you suggest a way, to educate your enemies, that doesn't invlove any physical arm twisting?

How about leave them fucking alone.

At 8/5/06 04:24 PM, -Puzz- wrote: How about leave them fucking alone.

Leaving them alone (Gaza/Lebanon withdrawals for example) evidently didn't change a thing.

At 8/5/06 04:34 PM, Dzex wrote:

At 8/5/06 04:24 PM, -Puzz- wrote: How about leave them fucking alone.

Leaving them alone (Gaza/Lebanon withdrawals for example) evidently didn't change a thing.

People like you are why people in the Middle East dislike us. Always thinking we know what's best for them, and meddling in their affairs. I don't think you would be happy if your home country was occupied by a bunch of smart asses who made you accept a different government because they thought it was better.

At 8/5/06 04:39 PM, LavaTemplar wrote: People like you are why people in the Middle East dislike us. Always thinking we know what's best for them, and meddling in their affairs. I don't think you would be happy if your home country was occupied by a bunch of smart asses who made you accept a different government because they thought it was better.

First of all, that's not what I was saying. What I meant by "not leaving them alone" is not standing still while our soldiers are getting kidnapped.

Secondly, I'm not for occupation. I'm pro a two-state solution in Israel and I don't think forms of government should be imposed on anyone. Anyhow, this is a topic about Lebanon, which is being occupied by Hezbollah if anything.

But a way of thinking that does not include the desire to destroy the infidel is something that I do think should be imposed upon them.

At 8/5/06 04:50 PM, Dzex wrote:

But a way of thinking that does not include the desire to destroy the infidel is something that I do think should be imposed upon them.

I completely agree with that. You just have to remember that the Koran was written a long time ago. Attitudes like that were acceptable in those times.

There are plenty of Muslims that don't agree with terrorist actions, and the only way to stop more from being convinced is to stop giving them reason to resort to violence or hate others.

At 8/5/06 04:53 PM, LavaTemplar wrote: There are plenty of Muslims that don't agree with terrorist actions, and the only way to stop more from being convinced is to stop giving them reason to resort to violence or hate others.

But how do we deal with the ones already convinced?

At 8/5/06 04:59 PM, Dzex wrote:

At 8/5/06 04:53 PM, LavaTemplar wrote: There are plenty of Muslims that don't agree with terrorist actions, and the only way to stop more from being convinced is to stop giving them reason to resort to violence or hate others.

But how do we deal with the ones already convinced?

Well, one way is ignoring them. They have brains. They'll see if they're getting nowhere.

Or, like I said, give them no reasons to hate others, because they won't make any progress if noone will listen or their opinions change.