Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by skunk, Aug 19, 2006.
Yeah... those 50 French troops is gonna stop'em.
I think it's susposed to be, roll over our 50 and we'll be there en mass??
So Israel engages in a blatant violation of the ceasefire agreement and what you choose to comment on is the size of the French commitment? Does anything that Israel does give you pause to consider its actions?
It looks like some of the folks in the IDF and the Israeli cabinet are looking for a way to dig in in southern Lebanon and continue this crisis. I'd expect the UN to condemn this and sanctions to follow against Israel if this was almost any other country. With a guaranteed veto, via the US, of any action in the Security Council, Israel thinks it can violate the ceasefire with impunity.
israel broke the ceasefire, lebanon is threatening to not honor the deal, and hezbollah is still sticking to the cease-fire. oh, the irony.
So this is the second cease fire that Israel has broken.
As said previously:
I don't really trust anything anybody says on either side, but I did expect that if anybody broke the cease fire it would be Israel. Too bad our government is so blindly supportive of anything they do. I personally don't see much difference between Israel and Lebonon; they both want to see the other wiped off the face of the earth.
You're about to be reminded of how righteous Israel is. Any minute now.
I know it wasn't long before someone start shooting again.....now I would like to see actions taken....if any by the UN.
E.L.E......Extinction Level Event I guess
Add an "or does" in there and you've got the situation about right, I think.
Good pont. I don't really trust anything anybody says or does on either side
Just curious, but if Hezb is rearming, didn't they break it first?
i believe that would be true.
This is what Israel agreed to...
There's no "ifs" about whether Hezbollah has already said it won't abide by that, and the Lebanese army had already affirmed that it has no intentions of enforcing it.
So there is no such thing as a 'ceasefire agreement' because the terms that were agreed had already been broken by Hezbollah. Let's see you talk your way out of this.
When, according to the SC resolution, was this suppose to have occurred by? The Lebanese government hasn't renounced the Taif Accords, and the fact they aren't implemented today doesn't give the Israelis the right to violate the ceasefire. Plain and simple, one, Lebanon is a sovereign nation and the Israelis have no right to invade or occupy its territory; two, it is an Israeli action of a commando raid deep into Lebanese territory that jeopardizes the ceasefire.
Pretty much talked about this in the "With Love from Israel" thread. From what I understand, Hezbollah broke it first, and Israel is only reacting.
what is the point in asking "when?" since Hezbollah has already announced that "never" is "when" they will comply with the requirement to disarm???
The Lebanese government has already said their army wont be disarming Hezbollah, even if they haven't renounced the Taif Accords
both sides should respect the agreement.......but what you're suggesting is that the Arab side is allowed to violate the ceasefire as they feel fits their purpose, but the israelis aren't.....that's simply a double standard
@Macky-Mac."....that's simply a double standard"
It cannot be any other way. The entire basis for the middle east conflicts with Israel have always been and are still predicated on the desire of some Arab groups and governments like Hezbollah, Hamas and Syria, to completely eradicate Israel. And as the bulk of Arabs' lives are controled by despotic dictators and mad mullahs that keep everyone in and under control with brutality and religious extremism, it ain't gonna change real quick.
As it is an utterly indefensible position, it goes without saying that any justification or defense of this position cannot be anything but a double standard.
What I can't figure out is how Hezbollah is able to rearm if the IDF has destroyed every single path to Syria.
No, what I'm suggesting is that it isn't the right of Israel to interfere in the politics of Lebanon. It is the right of the Lebanese government to disarm Hezbollah how and when it sees fit. It is most certainly not the right of Israel to set its own demands concerning Hezbollah and it is absolutely not Israel's right to attack Lebanon and break the ceasefire because it doesn't like how a sovereign neighbor is dealing with its own internal affairs. What the Israeli government doesn't seem to get is that simply because Israel has the largest and most well armed military in the region it doesn't have any greater rights than other state.
The problem is Lebanon has had a decade to accomplish the disarmament of Hezbollah. Meanwhile they had stockpiled a ton of missles all pointed south at Israel. Basically the Lebanese government looked the other way. They failed to stop Hezbollah and in the end provoked an attack.
Thats the bottom line isnt it. Meanwhile Iran is having what it says is a practice military movement of sorts and the 22nd is almost here. Irans answer to the west? Mid east ....
No, it's not an issue of Israel interferring in the politics of Lebanon. Under the conditions of the ceasefire Hezbollah has an obligation to disarm and the government of Lebanon has an obligation to assure that Hezbollah disarms....these are NOT israeli demands but rather part of the terms and conditions of the UN resolution that both Hebollah and the central government accepted and initially committed to. Complying with the ceasefire is definitley not a matter of Lebanese internal affairs but quite clearly a matter of fulfilling a committement to the international community
Both sides of the conflict have obligations to meet under the ceasefire and to continuely condemn only one side for its actions is nothing more than a double standard.
Please show me the "how" and "when" of Hezbollah's disarmament as outlined in the SC resolution? It is an internal affair of Lebanon to work out the "how" and "when;" it is not an internal affair to work out the "if." Also please show me where, in the SC resolution Israel is given the right to attack if it isn't satisfied with the "how" and when" of Hezbollah's disarmament. Oh, and if you can find it, let me know what gives the Israelis the right to target Hezbollah leaders for assassination? Lastly, if you can, show me where the UN has accused Lebanon, as opposed to Israel, of violating the ceasefire.
I bet you loved the piece of paper, I mean agreement Chamberlain had with Hitler.
No one is pro or for war, but niether are they for their own elimination.