Another log for the fire

[spike]

correct.

Neither side is innocent. I have a friend that lived in Israel for several years and another that was born/raised there and served his required time in the Israeli military.

Neither of them is very proud of the way Isael has handled things.

 

[spike]

captive?

I don't understand the question. Yes, usually when people are arrested they are held captive.

The article also mentions 15 killed civilians.

 

[paul_valaru]

Then why the misleading, you say captive like they where abducted, kidnapped, instead of arrested.

As too 15 dead civilians, when the Gaza has no standing army everyone is a civilian, who is to say they where not armed, etc.

Air strikes have killed 15 civilians in Gaza in recent attacks aimed at militants

And even if they where innocents, this line still sounds better to me than

15 killed in suicide bombing against a school bus

or 20 killed in bombing attack of wedding

or 10 killed in rocket attack against a school.

 

[spike]

Then why the misleading, you say captive like they where abducted, kidnapped, instead of arrested.

As too 15 dead civilians, when the Gaza has no standing army everyone is a civilian, who is to say they where not armed, etc.



And even if they where innocents, this line still sounds better to me than

15 killed in suicide bombing against a school bus

or 20 killed in bombing attack of wedding

or 10 killed in rocket attack against a school.

Arrested is the same as taken captive. The wording doesn't change the fact that that they both did the same thing.

Who is to say they weren't armed? Who is to say they were armed. They are just dead without sufficient reason. I can't go out and mow down 15 people and say they might have been armed.

Air strikes does sound more romantic than rocket attack. Again, same result.

I'm sure if the Palestinains could conduct air strikes they wouldn't suicide bomb nearly as much right?

 

[paul_valaru]

Arrested is the same as taken captive. The wording doesn't change the fact that that they both did the same thing.

Who is to say they weren't armed? Who is to say they were armed. They are just dead without sufficient reason. I can't go out and mow down 15 people and say they might have been armed.

Air strikes does sound more romantic than rocket attack. Again, same result.

I'm sure if the Palestinains could conduct air strikes they wouldn't suicide bomb nearly as much right?

Legally taken prisoner, and afforded the human rights associated with being taken prisoner by a recongnized goverment is much diffrent that being abducted by a terrorist group.

no you can't go mow down people, and army on the other hand can make a military attack.

are strike against military targets is a hell of a lot different than a rocket attack against a school.

 

[spike]

Legally taken prisoner, and afforded the human rights associated with being taken prisoner by a recongnized goverment is much diffrent that being abducted by a terrorist group.

no you can't go mow down people, and army on the other hand can make a military attack.

are strike against military targets is a hell of a lot different than a rocket attack against a school.

Who's says it's legal? Did Palestine say it was legal? Israel made these "arrests" outside their own country. How is that legal?

If we label the people "army" they can kill civilians. Good.

An airstrike that kills civilians is no differnt than a rocket killing civilians. As I said if the Palestinains could use air strikes instead I'm sure they would.

The only difference between the 2 is wording. Semantics.

 

[paul_valaru]

I am sure they would too, what is your point?

and an army can make military attacks, trying to minimize civilian causlties, but they happen.

they want it to stop, return the soldier.

Palestine brought all this upon itself, they pushed and pushed, and now they run to the media when pushed back.

And until unbiased reports come out about civilians being hurt, I have a problem beleiving the numbers, these are the people who dug up graves to expand and create body counts in Jenin, as well as the famous funeral march where the body fell, and got up again, by itself.

 

[spike]

I am sure they would too, what is your point?

and an army can make military attacks, trying to minimize civilian causlties, but they happen.

they want it to stop, return the soldier.

Palestine brought all this upon itself, they pushed and pushed, and now they run to the media when pushed back.

And until unbiased reports come out about civilians being hurt, I have a problem beleiving the numbers, these are the people who dug up graves to expand and create body counts in Jenin, as well as the famous funeral march where the body fell, and got up again, by itself.

The point is since they can't make airstrikes they retaliate in other ways. Because Israel has the means to make airstrikes does not make them beter or more morally correct.

If Israel wants it to stop they can return their captives as well.

An arguement can just as easily be made that Israel brought all this upon itself. Israel has done more than it's fair share of heinous things.

Back and forth they go. I don't really understand the Israel bias.

 

[paul_valaru]

The point is since they can't make airstrikes they retaliate in other ways. Because Israel has the means to make airstrikes does not make them beter or more morally correct.

the fact that they are more morally correct has nothing to do with theie air strike capabilities

If Israel wants it to stop they can return their captives as well.

they have returned prisoners in the past, they will not make an exchange under threat

An arguement can just as easily be made that Israel brought all this upon itself. Israel has done more than it's fair share of heinous things.

your right, being a jewish homeland surronded by arabs is such a heinous thing to do, and it did bring it upon themselves by existing

Back and forth they go. I don't really understand the Israel bias.

If you want to understand the bias, read the history of Isreal, starting about 1820

 

[2minkey]

1948 might be worth to look at, or 1967...

yeah i'm familiar with those dates, too.

but 1982 is the significant one in this case. marking a change in israeli actions from what was previously largely defensive to aggressive. 'cept maybe the stern gang and their buddies. oh no wait they didn't exist, because israelis are exempt from any criticism because of our guilt about the holocaust.

 

[spike]

the fact that they are more morally correct has nothing to do with theie air strike capabilities

they have returned prisoners in the past, they will not make an exchange under threat



your right, being a jewish homeland surronded by arabs is such a heinous thing to do, and it did bring it upon themselves by existing



If you want to understand the bias, read the history of Isreal, starting about 1820

Why are they mora morally correct. They make illegal "arrests" outside of their own country. Using different words does not equate with morality. One is as bad as the other.

If Israel will not release captives under threat then Why should countries that have their captives?

The heinous things Isreal has done is not being a jewish homeland although some of those things were done creating that homeland. I gained a fair knowledge of the history of Israel a few years ago. Which is why at this point I can see that they are as bad as the people they fight with.

Before I learned the history I had been fooled by the wording and pro-Israel bias and thought they were on the side of right. Even my jewish friends who lived or grew up in Israel don't believe that.

Why are you so obviously biased. Are you Jewish? Have you been to the area?

 

[Inkara1]

Why are you so obviously biased. Are you Jewish? Have you been to the area?

I have to say, I simply love how someone who doesn't agree with you is "biased."

 

[chcr]

I have to say, I simply love how someone who doesn't agree with you is "biased."

Introduce him to Gonz.

 

[MrBishop]

I smell a red herring

 

[spike]

I have to say, I simply love how someone who doesn't agree with you is "biased."

Maybe biased is too early of an assumption. My apologies. It was not because he disagreed with me however.

It seemed like similar actions by both sides were seen completely differently. How would you describe that?

 

[chcr]

Maybe biased is too early of an assumption. My apologies. It was not because he disagreed with me however.

It seemed like similar actions by both sides were seen completely differently. How would you describe that?

Everyone is biased. It's inescapable.

 

[spike]

True enough

 

[Luis G]

Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah has promised "open war" against Israel, in an address broadcast shortly after his Beirut offices were bombed by Israel.

The militant group said its leader was unhurt in the attack. It was not clear when his remarks were recorded.

Israel is demanding Hezbollah free two Israeli soldiers. More than 60 Lebanese have been killed in the offensive.

Meanwhile Israeli military officials say a naval ship has been badly damaged by a Hezbollah explosive drone.

If confirmed, it is thought it would be the first time Hezbollah has used such a weapon.

In his address on Hezbollah's TV channel in Lebanon, Sheikh Nasrallah referred to an Israeli warship he said had launched attacks from of the coast of Lebanon, saying: "Look at the warship that has attacked Beirut, while it burns and sinks before your very eyes."

Israel later confirmed that one of its warships had been "lightly" damaged by rockets fired from the shore.

But later unnamed military officials were reported as saying that the ship's steering had been damaged, that its helicopter deck had been hit and that it was still on fire hours after the attack.

There were no reports on casualties, and reports on Al Jazeera TV that four seamen were missing were unverified.

Sheikh Nasrallah threatened Israel, saying: "You wanted an open war and we are ready for an open war."

The Hezbollah leader promised "war on every level". He said the Israeli coastal city of Haifa would come under attack, "and believe me, even beyond Haifa".

"Our homes will not be the only ones to be destroyed, our children will not be the only ones to die," he said.

Hezbollah has continued rocket attacks on northern Israel - 70 were fired on Friday alone.

A mother and daughter died in an attack on the town of Meron. Two Israelis died in attacks on Thursday.

Leaflet warnings

The crisis began when Hezbollah guerrillas seized two Israeli soldiers in a cross-border raid from Lebanon on Wednesday. Eight Israeli troops were also killed.

Israel responded with a major offensive - its biggest in more than two decades. The targets included not only Hezbollah positions but strategic sites like main roads, bridges and Beirut's international airport.

Residential areas near Hezbollah positions have been hit in air strikes, the group said.

Israel has warned residents by leaflet to stay away from Hezbollah locations.

Israel's chief of staff, Dan Halutz, said the two captured Israeli soldiers were still alive.

A third soldier, captured by Palestinian militants in the Gaza Strip where Israel is conducting a separate operation, is also still alive, he said.

Calls for restraint

In an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council, Lebanon called for an end to the Israeli operation.

The offensive was destroying infrastructure and causing the death of innocent civilians in full view of the international community, said Nouhad Mahmoud, Lebanon's ambassador to the UN.

Israeli Ambassador Dan Gillerman said Israel had no choice but to react to Hezbollah's aggression, describing the group as "merely the finger on the bloodstained and long-reaching arms of Syria and Iran".

The escalation has sparked international calls for restraint.

French President Jacques Chirac said the Israeli air strikes were "completely disproportionate" and the Vatican described them as an attack on a sovereign and free nation.

Mr Olmert said he would agree to a ceasefire if Hezbollah returned the two captured soldiers and stopped firing rockets at northern Israel, and Lebanon implemented UN Security Council resolution 1559, calling for the disarmament of the militant group.

Hezbollah has said the captured soldiers will not be returned without a release deal for Palestinian, Lebanese and other Arab prisoners held in Israeli jails.

Unbiased source

 

[Gonz]

Who's says it's legal? Did Palestine say it was legal? Israel made these "arrests" outside their own country. How is that legal?

You are alreay under false information. There is no country called Palestine. Never has been. They, then, have no army. The radicals that live in the palestinain region of Syria, Lebanon, Saudia Arabia & Israel attack civilians as a matter of cource & record...ala terrorists. Israel retaliates for these attacks, as is legal under all world treaties & civilians get killed, mostly because the terrorist pussies hide under womens dresses & behind children.

minkey...when Israel begins attacking other countries, without previously being attacked from within those countries, you may have an argument. Until then you're spouting Arab propaganda.

 

[spike]

Palestinians retaliate for Israeli attacks, Israel retaliates for palestinian attacks. Back and forth. It's like the chicken and the egg.

Israel has probably killed as many or more civilians as any of the people they fight with. If it ok for Israel to retaliate then it is ok for the other countries to retaliate. They all should try something else though.

The "pussies" don't have the military funded by the US to take on Israel head to head so they are forced to fight by other means.

Israel has attacked other countries many times without being attacked first. So minkey has a point.