http://www.israel-un.org/sec_council...14july2006.htm
Statement by the israeli ambassador to the UN before the Security Council:

Iran isn't quite a neighbouring country to Israel.

Literally they're not, no, but a threat never the less. Remember the first gulf war and the Iraqi scuds reaching Israeli soil? Long range missiles are abundant in those parts of the world.

yeah we should know we sold them to most of them along with russia.

'whats that? your nation has a terrible record on human rights and shows contempt for all around. have some of these weapons'

Ok I didnt read much past page four but Im fairly familiar with both sides of this interminable debate, i just wanted to reply to a couple of the earlier statements about choosing sides etc, as well as the whole left right thing. I just think its about time that sort of thing stops, your enemies enemy is not your friend, ideologically Im pretty left but cant support any leftist parties because of all the bloody Socialists, these people refuse to accept the USSR as a bad entity because it was the enemy of the US, they gloss over Cambodia, China, North Korea etc just cause they represent an alternative. And they still call each other Comrade in meetings which makes them impossible to take seriously. Anyway factionalism and choosing sides is the key ingredient in conflict, whats needed is third party moderators and neutral influences to calm shit down, like international institutions or non politically alligned organisations, or popular movements of the people.
In terms of this situation people always immediately choose sides and demonise the other, no attempt at understanding is made. Israel supporters dont recognise the poverty, occupation, loss of land and refugee crisis as legitimate grievances. Supporters of Palestinians/Arabs refuse to recognise Israels security concerns, or the historic foundations for their sensitivity. Both sides claim to be right. Dogmatic refusal to understand or emphathise with the enemy gets people nowhere.

I personally think in this case the onus is on Israel to withdraw to 1967 borders, I think all their peace deals etc are token gestures without that being done. But that doesnt make them a target for civilian attacks, suicide bombings and rocket attacks on population centres arent justified by that. Likewise responses that do the same. And round and round.

Agreed.

And round and round...

Remember the Iran/Iraq war? Iran's nuclear program was started as a deterrant to Saddam. They have made a lot of threats towards Israel over the years, none of them defensive in nature.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/13072006/32...on-crisis.html

Wow, that`s quite surprising, in a positive way.
I`m pretty opposed to Saudi government, but their stance on the Lebanese/Israeli conflict sounds pretty reasonable.

Israel---terorrist Number 1. ! ! ! !

Die, space_monkey...

Word!

fuck off alyasa!!can you see how many civilians have israels army killed in 3 day ,so fuck off stupid bitch!!

Both sides do shady shit man......if people would either say fuck yr old religion or have some God damn respect (since they are so Holy) for other people/religion then there wouldn't be all of this shit going down because of boredom.....get a life or stop by my place for the party you bastids. WAKE UP.

I heard that 8 Canadians were killed in an Israeli air raid in Lebanon yesterday.
Maybe now that Israel has made it clear that they don't care who they kill, the International community will finally start trying to organise a cease fire.

BTW did anyone hear Bush's 'off air' solution to the crisis?
He thought his mike was off, and was talking to Blair whilst eating his lunch. The conversation went thusly:
Bush - "What they need to do is get Syria to get Hizbollah to stop doing this shit and it's all over"

Blair - "Hmmm"

I wonder if that's the message Condi will be taking with her when she visits the area.

Looks like this shit is escalating...

...and it looks like it's not ever going to end.

Was Bush's mic faux pas staged or really real?
On a related note, has anyone seen the unwelcome massage that Bush gave to German Chancellor Angela Merkel?

I also find it a bit curious how every time "Hezbollah rockets" are mentioned, the Iranian connection is rightly made, but every time "Israeli warplanes" are mentioned, no one bothers to report that these are undoubtably F-16 fighters that the U.S. sold Israel.

Today, the early coverage is of the helicopter carrier USS Iwo Jima that has been sent to escort chartererd cruise ships carrying Americans (& other evacuees?) & also help pick-up those in Lebanon that want to leave. What the news isn't telling everyone is that refugees are being asked by the U.S. State Department to sign a promissory note, for which they are billed later for around three hundred dollars, plus the interest on the note.

This has already lasted longer than 6 days....
I saw what florya mentioned about the g8 footage where Bush and Blair were talking privately with the mics still on. Fucking gunslinging cowboys is what they are!

WTF? This guy doesn't know how to keep his hands to himself! :mad:

holy shit that is so weird. i saw that. it's kinda funny and he probably meant it in a "let me lighten this place up" way. he's the political frank drebin from naked gun. but this is a fuckin international G8 meeting about a serious war in the middle east. ya know? the dude doesn't care about anything but the power that comes along with being the most powerful man in the world.

he still hasn't asked for a cease fire. it's the right thing to do, regardless of anything. And it's a complete tacid arrangement with the hardliners in israel that are feeling threatened by the rapid rise of radical islamists, risen ironically by bush's hopeless push for democracy in that region through force. let it happen naturally. its the only way. don't lie about WMD and turn into democracy for all. like i say, people r too smart for that. one of the first things a lebonese woman said on tv after israel killed her family was "this is bush's fault" , ranting about the U.S policy, the west policy, not anything about israel directly..that is how terrorism is bred.

Isn´t it about time to change the title of this thread into "Hizbollah vs. the rest of the middle east"?!

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satelli...cle%2FShowFull

Most people in Lebanon don't give a shit about Hezbollah and have never voted for them. Those cunt's are just as bad as the Israeli forces that are invading. They hide in civilian populated areas and think that the Israeli forces won't dare to bomb the suburbs flat.

yeah "most" --- 55% Tokolosh, but er ah...Tony Blair just made the same misleading statement you just did when he addressed Paliament today.

An estimated 45% of citizens of Lebanon are Shiite fundamentalists & support Hezbollah. The current fighting is sure to push those numbers into the majority, as planned.

In Iraq we saw "free & democratic elections" basically translate to Sunni disenfranchisement & a push that elected a Shiite state-sponsored hardline Muslim extremist government just like neighbor Iran. This same trend will continue throughout the Middle East as the U.S. supposedly fights for "freedom" & instead engenders a new, much larger wave of anti-Zionist terrorists.

If one wants to boil all this down & distill it, then the basic substance of it all is that the U.S. is manipulating things to help the Shias gain a great amount of power in the whole mideast region. We are in league with them covertly & have been since Reagan. The push is being made to create a real terrorist enemy, much more substantial than the rag-tag al-Queda. It seems the DOD, the DOE, the military-industrial complex, & corrupt politicians want to be sure to create a scenario by which they can continue to pass bloated budgets that they can siphon & steal from at will. As the world has reached peak oil & the shit is certainly about to hit the fan in the coming years, those that are in power are making a mad grab for as much money as they can get their grubby hands on & if one addresses it properly, the same politicians can always villify the concerned critic by pointing a finger right back at them...you see, it's the "perfect" crime. Back during the cold war, one was a "commie" if they criticized U.S. policy. These days, one is labelled a "terrorist sympathizer" if they spread the truth that could threaten the activities of the thieves.

I have no problem with Israel going after the Hizbollah guys that are firing rockets from the southern border of Lebanon into northern Israel.

That would be self defence.

What I find offensive is Israel's deliberate targetting of civilian infrastructure like power stations and fuel depots, the deliberate targetting of legitimate and highly visible aid convoys that include ambulances, telling civilians to leave their villages and then targetting their cars and trucks when they do.

My feeling is that Israel has been waiting for an excuse to take revenge on Lebanon for the bitchslap they were given in 2000.

This is not Israel v Hizbollah, this is Israel v Lebanon.

This will go on til Lebanon is fucked.
Hezbollah will never disappear. Attacking terrorist organisations only makes them stronger if you look at the history of the region.

Why doesn't Bush want a ceasefire?

Look at it this way - Israel is killing Arabs. The US supports Israel when they kill Arabs. Israel needs weapons with which to kill Arabs. The US supplies Israel with weapons. Israel gives the US lots of money for those weapons. That money goes towards funding the Iraq fiasco where, surprise surprise, the US is killing Arabs.

Rumsfeld and Cheney must be laughing their asses off!

Good point Atari. Hadn't thought of that.

I wondered that too.

[quote=Bastian]Isn´t it about time to change the title of this thread into "Hizbollah vs. the rest of the middle east"?!
[quote]

It's Hesballah

Not attacking terrorist organisations is what makes them stronger. If a terrorist organisation is losing important personal all the time and needs to replace it`s leaders every few months, this will make it harder for them to function.




Pretty weak argument. There`s more money to make in selling arms to hunderts of millions of arabs, whose countries own plenty of oil, than to the tiny state of Israel.

Surprise, surprise: In Iraq, most arabs (and mostly arab civilians that is) are killed by: arabs! The USA is trying to prevent this, and sacrifices american soldiers for it. What do you think would happen after a premature pull-out from Iraq? Most likely civil war. That`s why America is putting it`s soldiers into danger to enable the Iraqi democracy to get stronger, to rebuild it`s army and police force, and to eventually (hopefully soon) be able to control Iraq on it`s own, without US support.

On 9/11, Rumsfield was in NYC at a meeting of the board of directors of The Carlyle Group, a prominent military contractor. Perhaps he was laughing his ass off as he watched the events unfold because the plan was coming together.

On 9/11, Cheney is reported to have been giving the order to stand down at NORAD in Colorado, essentially telling our military that it was "all a drill." Whether it's true or not is not clear, but some ex-employees & their lawyers also maintain that they are still being hounded by the CIA for spilling those particular beans.

[quote=Lurker][quote=Bastian]Isn´t it about time to change the title of this thread into "Hizbollah vs. the rest of the middle east"?!

Sorry, I was using a different transliteration.
Well, actually it`s this, anyways:

‮حزب الل

There's lots of acceptable anglicized spellings, but all in all, I'm just trying to ignore Bastian's posts.

"Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
- George Santayana

Well, that`s probarly easier than discussing about the points I raise.

I have found from previous political threads that engaging in debate with someone that merely parrots the media's perspective is about as effective as banging my head against a wall.

My words will stand just as yours will & the reader will decide.

How about that for a novel concept?

I have no use for the endless post-quoting & all that eventual crap as the thread gets polluted with muck.

To that end, you have just been placed on my ignore list.

Right, well I'll spell it like that from now on.

Oh, seems like your computer does not support arabic writing. Sorry about that.

That's why i don't engage with such threads in the first place.There are more interesting ways to do your bit rather than the internet.And that's a fact.

Allright. Thanks for the "simpleton" though (nice quick edit job!).
Even though you can`t read me anymore now. It´s so much easier with your head in the sand, isn`t it.

"Merely parroting the media", allright. Too bad now you`ll never tell me were you get your informations and views from. By reading the media and thinking the exact opposite? Or what media I`m parroting exactly, since there seem to be a lot different, sometimes quite opposed positions to this whole situation in the media. Oh well..

Yeah, porkmarras, I'm just a slow learner, whereas we all know of your probing insights & far-reaching political activism. You people slay me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by atari 2600
Was Bush's mic faux pas staged or really real?



In the open mic "glitch" from a couple of days ago Bush named "Syria" not "Iran" & today, in a press conference he mentioned Syria, like, three times, & Iran zero times.

I actually agree with you about many of the points you made but it's nothing new. It doesn't take a genius to figure it out and the information is out there if you look in the right places. What I'm tired of hearing are all these conspiracy theories (probably true to some extent) about this or that plan the US government and some if not all European countries have up their sleeves when it comes to the middle east and their oil. The fact is that you and I will never know what's really going on behind the curtain and I think you're being pretty arrogant in this discussion by stating that I or others parrot the media's perspective. We are here to exchange ideas and hopefully find some truthful answers, not argue about how much each of us knows.