SeVeR

What the !@#$%^&* is your problem SVS? I think Hezbollah is a military organisation at war with Israel and you think they're terrorists. So we disagree, yet for some reason you choose to insult me in this way, calling me irrational. Am i insulting you right now? You and a couple of others really took issue with my criticism of Israel and it seems you can't give it a rest, even now. Grow up please. Are you two now inferring that because Lebanon was the weaker country, Hezbollah are a terrorist group for fighting a battle that could never have been won? What excuse are you going to use next?

As long as Israel exists there probably won't be any peace. From what Nasrallah said it looks like he's only going to change his tactics in future. Maybe this kind of regret will help dispel the belief that Hezbollah is a "terrorist" en!@#$%^&*y... so its probably just another kick in the teeth for Bush.

Then what would you say the reasons are for Iran's animosity towards the US? I would call the US bias in the region one reason from many. Are you going to reduce Iran's hatred of the US to something unprovoked and irrational in the same way you've done with Hezbollah's hatred of Israel? (by saying Hezbollah's objectives were met in 2000, when they so clearly have other objectives) ... So do tell, what is this a "cover" for? Firstly i was only talking about Northern Lebanon because thats a place where no rockets could have possibly been launched from, yet it was cluster bombed. Do you have evidence that "Northern Lebanon" is a storage warehouse? I thought that was the excuse for bombing South Beirut to the ground? Never mind... this is just a matter of who you trust, i don't trust Israel and you obviously do, if Israel says they only targetted rocket storage bases in the North rather than Christian villages with nothing to do with the conflict then then you'll believe them, i won't.

Interesting, i doubt a single rocket was launched from Northern Lebanon since the range of those things would make hitting Israel impossible. Its good to see the US doing something like this, maybe this kind of impartiality will help ease tensions between the US and nations like Iran.

http://www.angelfire.com/nm/halifax/rosters.shtml Remember this? ^ JWL2 had about 200 sign ups and got 100 people in the zone at a time... those were the days!

Right, so the government isn't ordering Hezbollah to attack Israel are they! Then you're an idiot for thinking that was their only objective. You seem to think that the people they have power over DON'T want the destruction of Israel. Another ignorant !@#$%^&*umption. True, i don't. Bad example, sorry.

Again wtf? When did i say that war is the only way to get the message across? I'm saying that war is the wrong way to get the message across. And i agree with their cause too. If they are still unhappy with their situation then we must decide what side to take. I agree with them in the same way that i agree with the Palestinians but i commend the approach of the Indians. And they're a part of Iran, Syria and other Middle East countries too. They don't take orders from Lebanon! When will you understand this? Its like you've convinced yourself that this is a fact to justify what's happened to Lebanon. Its not a fact and you shouldn't be passing it off as one. America has plenty of room. Hezbollah wasn't around back then. Thats why i said "or similar organisations" because i knew you'd try and twist this one around. True, what does this prove about their objectives? !@#$%^&* all, stop passing opinion off as fact. Who knows? If Lebanon wants Israel attacked and Hezbollah takes those orders then they are a tool and your !@#$%^&*umption that this is a fact is justified. If they attack Israel without orders from Lebanon then they are working more independently or in cahoots with Iran/Syria ---(Hint: Other countries where Hezbollah operates). True, the more educated the better.

Yes Iran has a much larger influence over Hezbollah but i doubt they take orders from the Iranian leadership. They may do, they may not, to say so either way would be another big !@#$%^&*umption but maybe not as uneducated as saying Hezbollah is a tool of Lebanon. I hope the UN peacekeeping force works and France stops sitting on their nuts. However the hatred will still remain and so will Hezbollah. A couple of things that could help the hatred in the long run would be to give the Palestinians the land that they were originally given by the UN in 1947 back. And secondly America should stop their unconditional support for Israel everytime something like this comes up... like when America originally went for a much more pro-Israeli version of the ceasefire agreement, but thats just one example from many.

Astro, wtf? I actually agreed with you a couple of posts back that WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER. If i thought that fighting was the only way to get my point across then i wouldn't be here typing, i'd be in Israel fighting. I think the Muslims are wrong for fighting Israel but i only believe they are wrong in the way they choose to fight.... its the complete opposite of what you just accused me off. I think they are right to want Israel gone so i only believe in their cause, not the way they choose to fight for it. However i'm still sympathetic because living in the Middle East would make it all hit home alot harder and rational individuals may be more tempted to fight Israel given their location and the impact on their lives. That is a terrible comparison and an unproven one. Its terrible because Israel has only existed for 60 years and there has never been peace there because throughout its ENTIRE existence most Islamic countries and their populations deny its right to exist. Its unproven because you don't know that Lebanon "hates" Israel. Lebanon isn't sending their army up against Israel. Hezbollah on the other hand does hate Israel and Hezbollah is not a faction of the Lebanese army and is not commanded by the Lebanese government. Hezbollah is an organisation that functions across the Middle East and hates Israel because they don't believe it should exist. They have every right to hate Israeal, they've hated Israel since it was first created which makes it a terrible comparison for Britain and France. Does time make the hatred of Muslims for Israel less valid/relevent/important? Of course it doesn't. Did Hezbollah or similar organisations have no right to hate Israel 60 years ago at its creation? Hezbollah have a representative in the government because Lebanon decided to be a demcracy. Is this the price they have to pay now?... People accusing them of being a terrorist state? What makes you think that Lebanon is using Hezbollah as a tool though? It's still completely unproven. If you were head of a powerful militant organisation and got elected into a government would you then just p!@#$%^&* control of your organisation over to the government and become their tool? I really do doubt it, and if anything is an example of one of your opinions being passed off by you as fact.

Astro: Look, my point was made a while ago and its simple to understand: If there is a war going on then we should take a side (or not get involved) based on who lived on the land while it was at peace last. There is a conflict between Israel and Palestine that needs resolving. There is not a conflict between Anglo-Saxons and Normandy or Vikings and Celts or Crusaders and Muslims that needs to be resolved. In lands of peace there is nothing to solve and no side to take, in Israel there is a friggin war going on where we are supporting one side already!... if it isn't already obvious for you to understand. I can't make it any simpler and i can't see how you can disagree without saying that we should equally be going to war all over the world to give land back to people from thousands of years ago. There has to be some sort of time-scale or condiition otherwise you end up with people invading anyone they want and saying "The Vikings did it and we aren't giving the land back now". That condition logically is peace and whether it has been established. Israel is not at peace! How could it be any simpler? Ok everyone who is being an !@#$%^&* on this thread and accusing me of passing opinion off as fact look no further than this quote. What evidence is there that Lebanon is using Hezbollah to do their dirty work? If you can't answer then you all need to shut the !@#$%^&* up. Astro, you still seem to think that Lebanon attacked Israel rather than a military organisation that is fighting Israel for reasons that are NOT limitted the occupation of Lebanon over the past few decades. They hate Israel and not just because Israel occupied Lebanon but for their very existence - meaning that they are very much apart of the Palestinian conflict. That's why a few posts back i made that very short post. Sil: Firstly, oh !@#$%^&*ing great another one. Secondly no i never said i had the quote and never said that Bush said those exact words. I said that Bush is giving that message out by labelling everyone who fights America as a terrorist and i certainly have proof of that. Actually i believe almost nothing to be factual. My opinion is mine alone and it is impossible to tell whether it is the truth. My very philosophy is that we can never really know what truth is. What i'm trying to do is spread that philosophy by casting reasonable doubt over these people who blindly believe in the peaceful, good-willed nature of Israel. So if you like i'm attacking other peoples versions of the truth. What i say i would never p!@#$%^&* of as truth. I'm sorry it seems that way but writing the word "probably" or "possibly" before everything is tedious... i hope you understand. Agreed, but above all it must protect its citizens from civil war. I'm repetive because i'm replying to you with the same responses i did to the other 3 or 4 posters that were then left unanswered... so the one being repetive here is you for bringing up the same answered points all over again. But that's my opinion of course, i'm sure you'll disagree because it makes you look like a hypocrite. Its become a trend in this topic: pro-Israeli posters taking solace in the comparable opinions of others and not answering my points, instead using dismissive unprovable insults. Its why this topic has been so frustrating, and now to top it all off i'm being accused of using too much opinion, its an absolute joke when almost every argument stops with a dismissive opinionated insult that doesn't answer anything.

We attribute too much fundamentality to these so called morals when if our life was in the balance or the future of the human race was at stake we would do both of those things in the name of survival which has to be the only true moral - like it is for all forms of life.

I couldn't agree more. You can interpret the Bible as saying "Kill Gays" or "Love gays and attempt to bring them closer to God". It all depends on whoevers holding the book at the time. Nature and Religion are constantly at war with eachother because the natural desire of human beings is to understand and trace morals or perceived truths back to their underlying cause. The flaw in religion is that the underlying cause is the mind of God. When we try to understand the mind of God we come up with all sorts of crazy ideas based on how we personally want God to be. The result is a very many people who justify their contradictory ideas by saying it's God will. This is Christianity, and this is why it is so dangerous.

The older the trash is when you bump it, the more it smells. Probably the most important lesson ever taught on the Internet.

Bush is using far more propaganda than Hitler ever did. And Bush is pro-Jewish in the same way Hitler was anti-Jewish. But otherwise they're close to being the same.

Astro: Does it matter, i'll change it to "the land of the Muslims (Islamic) people, namely the Palestinians, who lived there before the US/UN helped it become a Jewish state. Islamic land is a generalised term, not a faulty one. That area of the world has always been Arab and has for thousands of years been Muslim. You may have a case for African-Muslim countries but for the Middle East you have just as much of a case as people saying that America and Europe should be given back to non-Christians! Ok, so you took apart your own argument... Ya know Astro, i actually agree. It may not have been obvious from my other posts and i'm so glad you brought this up. All i'm trying to say on this forum is that Muslims have a right to fight for what should be theirs, their cause is not a terrorist/evil one and they shouldn't be grouped under the terrorist name-tag by the !@#$%^&*umption that the US/Israel is all-good and completely right in everything they do. I don't think the Muslims should be fighting Israel but i'm not going to call them radical/extremist/terrorist/madmen just because they're fighting for their cause in that way. Oh i think they are modernising a fair bit, especially in Iran, Saudi Arabia and some of the smaller countries around SA, also Turkey, Pakistan and North Africa are doing fairly well for themselves. I think the term Jihad may be a little strong to describe the opinions of Middle East countries. They're not actively at war with Israel and it is their right not to recognise it as a country. Not so, i only say that when i read someone saying exactly the same thing as what i would designate a propagandist pro-Israel/US opinion based on the differing ideology and political motives of the Bush administration. Worthless: Well firstly, i'm a physics graduate on a research year working at a DOE astrophysics laboratory in Tennessee, and have already been offered a post-graduate place at a top American university. So as for failing at life, i presume you meant failing to reach your level of ignorance? As for failing at the internet i really don't know what you mean. Is it even possible to fail at the internet? You must have made the internet a big part of your life if you believe you can fail at it. If thats the case then you've failed miserably at your life. No the difference is they are fighting for what they believe. I on the other hand am not affected by whats going on in the Middle East and would rather do something more with my life than fight Israel. I still attempt to make my case though by criticising Israel and the US... that is my way of fighting. We still share many of the same beliefs, the only difference is in our ways of fighting for them. I tried to explain to you that if i lived in the Middle East, was an arab and still held these beliefs then i would effectively be a terrorist in the eyes of Israel and the US because i would be spreading the same message as people like Nasrallah and Ahmadinejad. I guess you don't agree or don't understand that this conflict is a difference of opinion and not a difference of good and evil. Your inability to control your anger renders your opinions less relevent. I'm not saying your opinions are wrong, just when someone like you holds them it pretty much ruins the case for a lot of people trying to have a proper discussion from your side of the argument. And what influence do you think the US had (and still largely does) over the UN? If you want to spend hours reading transcripts of Bush's speeches then go ahead, i don't have the time or the willingness to do so. The quotes i gave you show that Bush has already branded everyone fighting against the US and Iraqi military within Iraq as terrorists. If i were dumb enough to pick up a gun and fight for what i believe in in that way then i would be a terrorist too. Don't you see that the terrorist tag is the West's way of de-humanising the enemy? Again, if you're so concerned about failure then try to tone it down a little bit or you'll end up discreditting yourself. I'd rather not, not because i think i'd lose the bet, but because i'm not gonna waste my time setting up a paypal account. By all means count all the facts in the entire thread though... although i don't trust your opinion of what a fact is. If you've taken all you can take then stop posting. Don't try and tell me what to do, if you want me to stop posting here then stop replying to my posts. There's a logical argument for you... SVS: Example please? Otherwise i've had enough of your inane comments which are themselves just your opinion being cited as fact (omg.. why do i keep finding your comments hypocritical!).

What the !@#$%^&* are you talking about credibility for? Everyone on this forum could think i'm bat-!@#$%^&* crazy and i couldn't give a flying !@#$%^&* about it. You, Astroprodigy and SVS have all proven yourselves less than able to provide rational explanations based on logical thinking and observations. I have shown you all how easily your arguments fall apart... leading to your last resort: dismissive insults without proper explanations. You are all truely pathetic because your arguments are based on propoganda and have absolutely no basis in reality once one traces that type of thinking back to the single underlying irrational !@#$%^&*umption. I cannot be any clearer on this and i don't expect you to understand. Oh and your question is extremely difficult to answer (and i think you know that) because i would have to dig up a very many Bush speeches. Here is one example of the indiscriminate "throwing around" of the word "terrorist" to describe anyone fighting against America: "The terrorists in Iraq share the same ideology as the terrorists who struck the United States on September the 11th. Those terrorists share the same ideology with those who blew up commuters in London and Madrid, murdered tourists in Bali, workers in Riyadh and guests at a wedding in Amman, Jordan. Just last week they massacred Iraqi children and their parents at a toy giveaway outside an Iraqi hospital." "At this time last year there were only a handful of Iraqi battalions ready for combat. Now there are over 120 Iraqi army and police combat battalions in the fight against the terrorists, typically comprised of between 350 and 800 Iraqi forces." It appears that anyone who is anti-American is a terrorist and with that term comes the implication that all these people are dispicable child-murdering, plane-bombing fascist nut-cases. When the truth is, they're fighting an invading power which is responsible for the creation of Israel on Islamic land. I'm sorry my list of examples isn't more extensive, i'm not going to go furrowing around the internet for Bush transcripts which seems to be the only way to answer your question. You only need to listen to Bush to see how many times he uses the word terrorist to describe everyone he is at war with. You're so full of !@#$%^&* that i'm gonna ask you to explain that. Why is my "logic based comparison" failing? You're just like that Wonderor guy who keeps making accusations as if it's a legitimate argument - You don't even know what a logical argument is! The British got the land through conquest and asked the UN to allocate it to someone. The US then took this oppurtunity to make it a Jewish state and told countries across Europe to relax laws to allow extensive immigration to Israel. Truman actually said that "I have many Jewish citizens but not so many Muslim citizens and my responsibility is therefore to them"... i wrote the exact quote in another post. Truman was almost single handedly responsible for the creation of Israel. Why would the UN suddenly decide to just give Palestine to the Jews? SVS: Then why do you keep replying? Last time i made a post i called you hypocritical on at least three occasions and now you're at it again! You really do define the word SVS. If you want to ignore me then do so. Comments like "lacks rational reasoning skills and factual knowledge of current events" mean absolutely !@#$%^&* all unless you back it up with something other than your own opposite opinion. I'm willing to bet i've given more examples of facts on this conflict throughout this topic than anyone and every opinion i present comes from years of interest into the affairs of Israel and the history of its creation. You on the other hand make these one-sentenced posts that continue to prove how ridiculously inane you are.

I could do it in 2 seconds so hahahahaahha!

And with that comment you cement my opinion that you are completely ignorant about this conflict.

No, this is Hezbollah at war with Israel. Hezbollah is a militant organisation intent on the removal of Israel and they are fighting for all people affected by Israel's invasions of Palestine AND Lebanon. They are not just fighting Israel for the !@#$%^&* of it, is that what you think? Say that back to yourself and tell me if any of that justifies taking people's land and homes away from them? Two wrongs make a right? That can only be the case if you regard Jews with higher status than Muslims, is that the case with you? If a kid gets his lunch stolen from him all the time at school, would you recommend the teacher grab someone elses lunch to give to that poor kid? If the Americans were so concerned and sympathetic to the Jews then why not create Israel in America or Europe? Why are our homes so much more precious than the homes of Muslims? I listened to his interview and it appears he was taken out of context. He doesn't deny that Jews were killed but he does object to it being used as an excuse to create Israel on Muslim land/homes. My race, location and religion has everything to do with whether i'm painted as a terrorist while i hold this opinion. So you're saying that based on an individuals power there need only be a possibility of something being done wrong (like massacring Jews) that warrants the conclusion that they're a m!@#$%^&*-murdering terrorist madman. What makes you think your opinion is so right in the first place? Its like saying a kid who bullies people in school should be locked up before they can grow up to become a drug-dealing street mugger. The Native Americans are not at war with America and are happy to live on their land. If they were not happy then we'd need to do something about it, but its been quiet for the last century or so so i don't think there needs to be anything done. Muslims are constantly warring with Israel and its not just extremists. Again its as if i'm arguing with the propoganda being piped through the news here when i'm talking to you. Whole crowds of people in Iraq are burning the American flag and shouting support for Hezbollah: you know what most news channels reported? - "Support for Lebanon" "Peace Protests".... it was an absolute joke when a couple of honest respectable news organisations got the truth of the matter to filter through. Iraq is just an example, but in Lebanon and Palestine there is a majority who want the destruction of Israel, its not just extremists! Did you ignore the election that resulted in Hamas coming to power?!?!?

First off i never said you were a republican or accused you of being one. I accused Bush of saying that everyone with opinions like mine should be branded with the terrorist tag that he uses to describe everyone against the US and Israel. If my skin was darker then you probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference between me and 90% of the people Bush brands as terrorists, but i'm still not a killer. I was asking more than anything IF you are in agreement with Bush. Maybe true, but Israel already has what they want and has the power to keep it because of all the weapons sold to them from the USA. I would say there is little reason for Israelites to hate the Muslims unless they've had friends or family killed. On the other side however you have millions of people and their descendents displaced. I think we all know that if Truman had had as many Muslims in his country as Jews in prominent positions then Israel would never have been created. What was the motive for Israel's creation? Can anyone answer that? What? Why is Iran's leader a madman???? The reason i accuse you and others of suc!@#$%^&*bing to Bush-propoganda is for statements like this. Why is he a madman? I know exactly how the press have suddenly started painting Iran and it's leader in the last 6 months and i find it astonishing since the only difference between him and us is ideology and opinion, it's so very far from good and evil! Proof? -(for the second part). I will now also call for the elimination of Israel! I won't be branded with the terrorist KILLER tag though because i'm a white, british citizen of no faith, who is not living in the Middle East. Of course if i fit the sterotypical terrorist then i would immediately be one for saying that... i would immediately be a m!@#$%^&*-murderer without even lifting a finger. Proof? Very well. Firstly, no-one is disputing land around the rest of the world. Europe, Australia, USA, are all examples of land that is not disputed and those that do dispute it have been given land to live on (American Indians, Aborigines etc). Israel is land that people are still at war over. While there is a war you have to decide whether to support one side or the other based on the cause of the war! The cause of the war is undoubtebly the creation of Israel by the USA in an illegal act. You're right that the word illegal doesn't have much meaning over history but while there is still a war going on we have to make a decision to support the side that has been wronged. Secondly there has been international law in place in this last century to prevent such takeovers and displacements of people from their homes. If your argument that the creation of Israel is justified by invasions for the last two thousand years then you are accusing every living person of being just as barbaric as we have always been. There's no other way that fits your reasoning. You can't just say: "We are barbaric and have always done this, so that makes it ok". Based on that reasoning we could still invade anyone we want with no qualms... or did our so-called morals only spring into existence less than 50 years ago? I would like to think that in the last century we have developed beyond that - our international laws make that case.

Yea, good point Astro.

Where's your proof? Proof? 1. I support "wiping Israel of the map" (interpret this correctly for godsake...) because it was created illegally on another people's land. 2. I'm sure that if Hezbollah had been sold sophisticated weaponry by the US they would use it to pinpoint Israeli military bases and government headquarters. 3. I'm sure that if Hezbollah built its own military bases and concentrated their army in these bases they'd be completely wiped out by now... instead they get accused of using human shields. 4. I'm sure that comments like this: ...ignore the mutual hatred in this conflict. Or maybe i'm just a terrorist, extremist, islamic, immoral madman .... or whatever the !@#$%^&* Bush wants you to think.

You realise that the protection of Lebanon is not the only goal of Hezbollah. Almost everyone agrees that Iran is in cahoots with Hezbollah and you know exactly what Iran's position on Israel is. So of course Hezbollah has a cause. You wouldn't nuke a country because one terrorist organisation within its borders decided to kidnap a couple of soldiers. So proportionate should always be a viable term... especially when you're not actually at war with the Lebanese people. I think Iran would destroy their oil fields or at least the refinerys/extraction plants. Not true, Iran is quite well split between extremism and normality. A large percentage of the youth are actually quite liberal. The problem you'd face after an invasion is keeping control. The US would have no way of controlling Iran and you'd likely end up with a similar situation a decade after an invasion. By then you'd likely have an even larger percentage of the population hating America's guts and the prospect of ever being at peace/understanding would be near impossible. Sure you may get rid of some of their weapons and weaken them militarily but the underlying problem would only be made worse. We're not at war with a whole country and thats the problem. We're at war with the people who hate us in these countries and i believe its a problem that will only go away when we stop our unconditional support for Israel... it might not even go away then since America is reponsible for Israel's creation. Finally we agree, but i guess for different reaosns. I only want Bush to stop describing everyone he dislikes as terrorists. He only does that to tap into the anger resulting from 9/11 to sway public opinion. The word terrorist has become a desciption of someone who is absolute evil... and Bush is throwing that word around too much. I've even noticed the Israeli's using the word in almost every statement they make. Hezbollah firing rockets at the people who are attacking them does not make them terrorists. Initializing this aggression by killing some Israeli troops and taking two prisoners does not make them terrorists either.

So what you propose be done about Iran now? I don't think America has the man-power, the public support, or most importantly the economic balls to do it. We all know what Iran can hang over the heads of the West: oil supply/prices. Iran are probably supporting Hezbollah but is that wrong? I don't admire Hezbollah's methods but their cause in my opinion is just, as is the Palestinians. They go about it the wrong way, but thats what we'd expect from a people centuries behind us in social development.

Good question. Both are at fault. Its never right to blow up a whole village to get at one terrorist, just like it isn't right for Hezbollah to operate around civilians. However i am also casting doubt over the nature in which Israel have bombed whole city blocks in South Beirut.. Israel must have had intelligence that all those buildings contained rockets or terrorists and i find that hard to believe. There may be terrorist cells operating out of specific buildings in Beirut but a whole region of the city? Bombing that whole area to the ground just seems a little bit indiscriminate don't you think? Israel are forced into the situation of having to take out some civilians by Hezbollah. I still think its wrong to "shoot the hostage" though. I find them more at fault for the indiscriminate destruction in Beirut. Now based on what i've said here, is it so difficult to understand my opinion and see where i'm coming from?