SeVeR

Enough of these baseless accusations already. Where's the evidence? In my opinion you do exactly the same thing. I agree. Yes, they expected a prisoner exchange and got a war. This surprised them.... so what exactly does this tell you about "How they think"?

Yes. I really don't think the whole of South Beirut is an armoury though. No-where in the above post. Scared of what? You?

And you're all telling me i'm ignoring facts? Seems to me that Israel blowing up entire city blocks in Beirut is an important fact that you're ignoring or at least dismissing. You seem certain that all these places were housing rockets, but how would Israel know, do they have a camera that can look through walls? All Israel knows is that South Beirut is a place with more Hezbollah support than other areas of the city. You for some reason think you know more than that.

The world (The US + its followers) would consider Lebanons defense of their country an act of terrorism in support of Hezbollah. Another reason is that their meager army of ,000 wouldn't stand a chance; After the war there'd be even more chaos with nothing to stand in Hezbollah's way.

You mean when Wonderor justified supporting Israel because Hezbollah were "surprised"? When i confronted him about it all he could say is that kidnapping is criminal. Or when Dr Worthless told me that Hezbollah were firing rockets from Beirut? Tell me where the facts are that i've ignored? I've been as thorough as i can be on everyones opinion. Stop seeking to discredit me by telling me i'm ignoring facts, you are following in the foot-steps of people who have shown their ignorance and lack of knowledge of this crisis. You are following people who have shown blatent bias without the proper evidence... and you're telling me i'm ignoring facts?!?! Please, go home, turn off the news and think about what's really going on in the Middle East. No, you only seek to interpret the facts in a pro-Zionist fashion. I'm telling you that you're regurgitating what the media is throwing at you. So once again you're attempting to totally dis-credit my opinion for the simple reason that i disagree with you. I only want you to wake up and smell the stench of your hypocrisy, your own total disregard for my opinion shows me that you are in denial. I have carefully analysed all of the facts, another thing you seem to be in dneial about. Actually i gave up posting here a few days ago, you seem adament to continue, which is another reason i'm calling you a complete hypocrite. Please answer this: How is my opinion propogandist? I'm telling you what i think, all the western governments and most of the western media supports your opinion. Yet another reason to consider you a complete.... oh never mind, you're just so full of it. Only because i have to repeat them for each of the 3 or 4 different posters on here who disagree with me. You being one of them.

I'm in the states for a year where every street corner has a flag waving... the patriotism is making me nauseous. It's pretty cool though, the guy in Radioshack was bitter because he was going for the same job i'm in and i just landed in this country, so haha Mr Radioshack, and its a mobile phone not a cell-phone you FUQK!! Anyway, will be back at Christmas and hoping 17th is still alive, so keep that cu!@#$%^&*ber warm for me perni

trip is such a !@#$%^&*

Its the second coming of pernille! Prepare thyselves for lots of um's, ih's, and 5 minute silences where you know she's masturbating with a vegetable of some description.

Its not irrational to point out that the extreme of indiscriminate killing would be to drop a nuke on Lebanon. I'm not actually suggesting that should be done. What the !@#$%^&* is your problem anyway? Point out where what i've said is irrational or shut the !@#$%^&* up. You can jump on the bandwagon that other posters have set up for you but if you can't back it up then you're a bigger re!@#$%^&* than they are. Then i commend the Lebanese government for NOT fighting Hezbollah. The resultant civil war would have been far more deadly to civilians. Its a matter of logic...

SVS: Your point? Are you suggesting this should be done? My point, if you did not grasp it, is that you have two extremes in this situation where you can destroy a whole country with no regard for civilians or you can send in forces who will take them out selectively. Then there are lots of ways in between, one of which Israel has chosen. I think they've gone too far into the realms of indiscriminate killing since they've destroyed whole sections of Beirut. Rockets cannot be fired from Beirut over the border and so the only reason Israel would have is that "the word is" Hezbollah has alot of support in that area. That isn't good enough reason to bomb such a large area. Ducky: I think you misunderstood me. The doctor wouldn't be forced to do anything but being the most qualified person in the hospital would make him the most likely candidate to save the life. So the situation is what is forced on him because there is no other way to save the life. Of course he can decline. The thing about inevitable failure is its likely that no other government from Lebanon could have done a better job. Maybe Lebanon should have asked for a peace-keeping force before all this happened but to their knowledge the UN peacekeepers who were already there should have been doing that.

Wonderor: Only true if failure was not inevitable. Do you think that after 2000 the government had a good chance of dominating Hezbollah and controlling the entire country within six years? Hezbollah is probably richer and better armed than the government is! I believe failure was inevitable, so forget the doctor trying to perform surgery he isn't qualified to do and think of the Afghanistani situation where the government holds almost no sway outside of Kabal. Well its a matter of opinion then, and whether you think its right to destroy a whole building to get at one militant. One extreme would be to nuke the whole of Lebanon, the other would be to send in ground forces to kill the militants without reducing whole city blocks to rubble. Israel has chosen something in between. I personally do not think they have chosen the right option, you must think they have, so i guess we'll agree to disagree. Ducky: I never said that the doctor would be forced to do anything. If the doctor is all that there is then he is most qualified to do the surgery but shouldn't be held accountable if something goes wrong. This analogy fits the Lebanese governments situation. The Lebanese government is all that there is, but that doesn't make them qualified to do the job. The way i see it the Lebanese government prevented a civil war by not attacking Hezbollah, many more would have died in that conflict.

Yes, if you are not capable of something then it never was your responsibility to do it. Like if you're a doctor and you don't know how to perform heart byp!@#$%^&* surgery then it shouldn't be your responsibility to perform that surgery. If you're the only doctor there and you're forced to "try" the surgery then if something goes wrong you shouldn't be sued for getting it wrong. Lebanon only has one government and that government is incapable of the task of disarming Hezbollah. You don't go to war with them based on that because there is absolutely nothing the Lebanese could have done without descending into a civil war. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5570554http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/629/629/5218106.stm If you are certain that a higher power (a God of some sort) exists then you are not an agnostic, just pump the word into dictionary.com. You are a deist or a theist or something like that.

Wonderer: All very true if the government is CAPABLE of these actions. If not then they cannot and should not be held to account, Hezbollah alone are responsible. SVS: Its "despite". They allow Hezbollah to take part in the government because Hezbollah were elected to that position by the people of Lebanon. Its similar to Hamas' election win except Hezbollah only won about 10% of the seats. Is this the price Lebanon pays for democracy? It certainly shouldn't be since Hezbollah is not in control of Lebanon and Hezbollah do not make policy decisions. Is the Lebanese army powerful enough to disarm Hezbollah? I don't think so, which is why i agree that Israel should be attacking Hezbollah, however Israel is attacking random targets: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/629/629/5218106.stm and levelling whole sections of Beirut. Israel is also attacking Christian dominated areas in the North of Lebanon for no apparent reason. I think you're misinterpreting what i'm saying. I agree with Israels decision to counter Hezbollah's attack! OK!?! (so you can stop all this "no logic, no ethics, no common sense" bullcrap you keep spouting). I do however have a problem with Israel's indiscriminate killing. Wonderer (again): What is with these baseless comments that proof nothing other than that you disagree with me. You just decribed me as not able to listen, disregarding responsibility, making excuses, and lacking morality and ethics. I'll describe you as blindly pro-Israel, offensive in an immature child-like manner, making excuses based on irrelevent facts, and lacking a definition of what morality really is. So what do either of our lines of insults prove? Absolutely nothing, so lets have a real debate please if you don't mind. Enough of the intellectually sound ways of saying "you're a stupid idiot and i disagree with you." I'm an astrophysicist and its crucial in every part of my job that i consider each causal factor and calculate the error attributed with each result or !@#$%^&*umption. I deal with probabilities every day, it is impossible for me to have been "trained" to think anything is absolutely certain to be true, it goes against everything i stand for and everything i work towards. I !@#$%^&*ure you i am a student of philosophy, religion, science and most importantly history, so everything i consider probable to do with this conflict has come from a large range of prior knowledge. You're telling me i've ignored it, i'm telling you that i merely disagree with you on what those causes are. You know as well as i do that this conflict did not start with Hezbollah kidnapping a couple of soldiers. It goes way back. You also know as well as i do that in response to Hezbollah's actions, Israel cannot use any level of force they want. Would you still be in their corner if they dropped a nuke on Beirut? Everything is relative, especially the level of force used to retaliate against an attack. If you just want to go an justify any response to Hezbollahs !@#$%^&*ualt then go ahead and remain as blind to me as you were when i read your first reply here. Oh good so you understand part of what i've just said. It happened because the Hezbollah militants hate Israel, thats all you need to know. THey probably hate Israel because they had family members killed at some point or they were taught that way by their parents. Their expectations however are completely irrelevent. They expected a less hostile counter-attack, so what? I really do not get why you think this is important. Yes i agree! And if they were surprised that they were treated as such, then why the !@#$%^&* should anyone care!?!?! I'm really at a loss as to why you think this is important. Yes they are criminals and deserve punishment, is that all you have to say, i would have thought that would be bloody obvious! Why the !@#$%^&* is this relevent because it does not change one thing about this conflict!?!? If Hezbollah were not surprised by the retaliation then would anything be any different now? No! ...I was surprised by Israel's reponse too, am i now good to go get blown up? One could say that Israel in their killing of civilians is criminal too. If you bomb half of Beirut and say you were targetting terrorists then you're a liar and a killer! You are not an agnostic if you believe that. Armies always are, including Israel's and the US's. However you stuck in use&abuse and i don't believe anyone would willingly be in an army that did that. This Islamists want to be in Hezbollah more than anything and are used in the same way any army uses its front-line fighters. How do Hezbollah treat people differently to the way Israel is treating people right now. Are you talking about soldiers or victims? You seem to have a very concrete opinion of what good and evil are. Anyway i'm glad you were able to reply without being arrogant and offensive for once.

Actually i already knew that a Hezbollah official is in the Lebanese government. It didn't change my opinion in the slightest. Just because someone from that organisation is on the government it doesn't mean that Hezbollah takes orders from the government.The Hezbollah official doesn't even have to inform the government of what his organisation is doing. I very much doubt that the government knew what Hezbollah was planning to do. I think there's a bit of an illusion that the Lebanese government knows about what's going on outside of Beirut. I understand that governments in countries like the USA and the UK are expected to know everything about all areas of their country but thats impossible for a government like the one in Lebanon. They don't have the man-power to even get close. For a comparison look at the situation in Afghanistan and how Kabal is about all that the government there controls.

...And that argument still isn't sticking unless you can explain how Hezbollah's "level of surprise" is somehow relevent to whats going on in Lebanon right now. I guess it could mean they weren't as prepared to defend against Israel? Please enlighten me if you can, as i'm at least trying to figure it out. The more you dodge the question the more i'll keep asking it. Telling me my opinion is stupid or claiming a lack of common sense and logic is baseless until you explain yourself. Keep on insulting me if you wish, i'll just keep asking you to answer the question you dodged by calling my post "stupid". Thats how children argue, they get stuck and go straight for an insult. Children somehow believe that insulting someone is an adequate counter-argument, but to the intellectual its a sign of capitulation. Since i asked you to answer the question these have been your responses. Are you going to keep dodging the argument to make these baseless sentences that offer nothing other than proof that my opinion is in disagreement to yours?

You're so full of it. I asked you a simple question which you couldn't respond to so you gave-up and called my post stupid. I'm sure that required alot of "common sense and logic". Did it finally click that you're interpreting irrelevent facts as reasons to support Israel? By the way its "you're" and not "your" you complete re!@#$%^&*. Get an education before calling another person's post stupid.

Why? You can't tell me why what you said is relevent to your arguments so your response is that my post is stupid? I don't know why i'm even arguing with dumb!@#$%^&*es like you. If all you're going to reply with is "thats stupid" then you're a waste of time on this forum.

So what? Hezbollah expected Israel not to invade half of Lebanon and bomb the airport, and they thought they could get away with their actions. I don't see how this is relevent or how it supports your argument. In fact it supports my argument more because it proves that Israel used a disproportionate amount of force to counter Hezbollah's actions. Other than that i have no idea what you're getting at.

Just to put what i'm saying into perspective, the Israeli attack on the UN outpost was the top story on most news networks, however Fox only had a story about Israels decision to militarise the border with videos of the following: 1. Hezbollah rockets hitting Haifa 2. Israeli soldiers die In fact the top story was a deflection away from the whole conflict and was about Iraq. Wonderor: Its completely irrelevent what Hezbollah expected to happen. I don't see why their surprise is connected with anything at all to do with this conflict. I was surprised about what Israel did too, as was much of the world, so whats your point? SVS: Its not an act of war from Lebanon. Its a particular terrorist organisation who do not own or operate the airport or South Beirut. You seem to think that Israel is actually confirming terrorist locations and selectively bombing them. Its obvious that this is not the case. I agree they shouldn't have to. They should militarise the border, ask NATO to control south Lebanon, take out the rocket positions and attempt to negotiate with Hezbollah. They have gone far beyond that. Anyone who believes the Israeli armed forces are an organized defensive force under the total command of their generals is a fool. When hate is in control, orders get unheard or disobeyed. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5217176.stm

Wonderor: Wonderor, i completely agree with you, Israel should have responded. But they should have been discriminate in who they targetted and they weren't. They levelled whole regions of Beirut without specifically targetting terrorists. They are just as bad as the terrorists who are indiscriminate in who they kill. The reason for Israel to attack was the kidnappings and the reason for the kidnappings was probably directly related to Israels use of force against Lebanon and the Palestinians in recent decades. You can't just say that it started with Hezbollah and even if you are doing that you can't agree that the indiscriminate killing is the right response to make. Worthless: I have no idea what that site is, so i can't help you. I didn't intend to dodge anything in your post, i thought i was as thorough as possible. If weapons are being held in Beirut then you still don't blow up whole civilian buildings and entire neighborhoods in the hope of getting at them. I guess they did get lucky, but i don't see how anyone can condone destroying civilian vehicles in the hope of getting one truck full of missiles. Great they succeeded in getting one, but how many civilians had to die? Well you haven't responded to most of my post and left many of the arguments unanswered, so i guess so. I know you're being sarcastic, i don't think all conservatives are evil, i just think that some conservative opinion that i object to gets into Fox News. As for the USA, i'm living here now, i don't think the country as a whole is evil, just the foreign policy of the government. The BBC is also not without bias, although its harder to find examples of it and they adhere to very strict principles in that area.

Wonderor: What simple facts? What emotional reponses? What lack of logic? Don't you mean "was capable of doing their job"? None of this justifies what Israel is doing. I would commend them if they took out the rocket positions, militarised the border and called for UN defense forces. But they're going far beyond that and targetting entire population centres, civilian infrastructure and random civilian vehicles. True. Lebanon should have controlled Hezbollah better. I commend any action that Israel has taken to eliminate Hezbollah targets and rocket positions. You're completely missing what i'm arguing about. Well lets invade South America then! There are plenty of people who have been kidnapped there. How about we blow up the rest of Iraq since there are plenty of people going missing there too.... how about we kill 300 civilians and maybe we'll get our soldiers back if we didn't already kill them ourselves? How exactly does blowing up the enemy get your soldiers back when you could easily be killing them in the process? How about we invade nations which happen to have hostage takers within their borders all over the World and destroy some civilian populations?!? There are people being kidnapped every day. Not only that but there are Israeli soldiers being killed every week, how exactly does this particular kidnapping change things? And why the use of force that will solve absolutely nothing? I've agreed that those are facts and told you exactly why there is no reason to counter it with the deaths of hundreds of civilians in a fruitless campaign where target selection is thrown out the window.

Worthless: Oh my God! I was actually about to apoligize for being presumptious in my opinion that you get all your news from Fox. I can't believe how right i was. You've just gone and proven everything that i personally thought of you and justified every attack i made on you. Fox is so full of propoganda that its a struggle to siphon of the facts without getting a descriptively bias chunk of conservative bull!@#$%^&* attached to it. I always believed you lapped it up like a good little tool. Where have i heard that before? Two posts back? Anyone can bomb a building and say there might have been a terrorist there ...Or they can bomb the whole of South Beirut and say "its a hot-bed of terrorist activity". None of that makes them in the slightest bit "selective" when it comes to who they kill. When Hezbollah fires rockets into Israel they can say "we're aiming for the Israeli checkpoints". You'd be a real idiot to believe that, but for some reason when Israel is the culprit you believe everything the US media tells you. Yet when the facts come out they don't support you in the slightest: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/5208912.stm >> At least 362 Lebanese, many of them civilians, and 37 Israelis - about half of them civilians - have been killed since the violence erupted 13 days ago. Oh wait, did you say that Israelies aren't targetting civilians and Hezbollah are? Wow, i wonder where you got that factually diluted republican garbage from. OH! WOW, really? Well Israel levels the whole of South Beirut with no regard for who is inside those buildings. There is absolutely no selection in who they kill at all! How are you so blind when you see the same thing coming from Hezbollah! Ok, so again i'll ask: From Beirut? Where else are they being fired from sparky? Show me Hezbollah's military installations. Show me a fort where the rockets are being fired. You wont find one, Beirut is their fort. Hey dumb!@#$%^&*, the range of Hezbollahs missiles is 70 km. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/738632.html >>Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Dan Halutz said Friday that Hezbollah has rockets with a range of up to 70 kilometers (43.5 miles) or more, an admission that brings more major cities within their range, including possibly Hadera and Netanya. This would mean that Hezbollah has rockets that could reach within 20 to 30 kilometers of Tel Aviv Fired from Beirut their rockets would barely even reach the border. So for the love of God, get your facts right before insulting my intelligence. They don't have any military installations. They're not firing rockets from Beirut though so you can throw your theory that all Israeli targets are hostile into the trash bin along with your Fox News subscription. No i'm using the fact that the Israeli army is showing no selection process in who they kill. One, what happened to Iran supplying the terrorists? Two, is a suspicion all that you need to murder someone? Three, they can't !@#$%^&*ing fire from Beirut. Yes. Or how about we go in the opposite direction and say that Israel and the Palestinians have been at peace at certain times in their existence just becaus for a few months there might not have been an attack. A few months to six years is as six years is to twenty. Even then its debatable if Germany was ever at peace during that period of time, prior to world war 2 they conquered czechoslovakia and austria, was that peace? Was the election of Adolf Hitler a sign of a people at peace? If you pound and pound your opponent until they cannot recover for a number of years that does not remove their will to strike back. As far as i'm concerned all that achieves is a momentary one-sidedness where either compassion of complete annihilation can be shown. If as soon as the opponent can fight back, they do so then the war was never over and the lack of fighting was only a strategic decision not to be completely finished off. No-one is contesting the land i live on. How can these simple premises p!@#$%^&* you by as you casually spout out these arguments worthy of a pre-teen? If you are a pre-teen i apoligise. You needed to be told that Santa isn't real? !@#$%^&*.....

What do you think any country attempting to legitimize its actions to the international community is going to do? The whole world is watching Israel and Israel is desperate to remain the "good guy". They still killed all those civilians, they still bombed civilian infrastructure, they're still terrorists because they have no selective processes on who they kill! Just like suicide bombers who walk into a market-place or a military base, they just want to kill Jews and it looks like Israel is conversly indiscriminate. So? They wait for the word "Kill" and then march in... so what? If they truely did this, then the terrorists would have been the first to relocate. Tell me why the planes have been bombing random cars? "Everyone pack and up and leave so we can bomb you", "If you stay we'll bomb you anyway"? How so? I had to tell you how to use the dictionary in the last post because all your definition had was a direction to look up another word that proved what i was saying! Am i a dumb!@#$%^&* for having an opinion opposite to yours? Well forgive me for existing outside your "realm of intelligence", but maybe you shouldn't be so quick to assume that yours is the intelligent opinion.

What are you talking about, your own definition backs me up: A terrorist is a person who employs terrorism. So lets look up terrorism to find our definition: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/terrorism Terrorism: The calculated use of violence (or threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimindation or coercion or instilling fear. Are you !@#$%^&*ing kidding me? The only reason for this Israeli invasion is to say "Don't mess with us". They are scaring the crap out the civilian population of Lebanon to the point where they're afraid to leave their homes to get food! And its all to force their political agenda which is to reduce support for Hezbollah. They fit the definition perfectly. What what what!?!?!?! Again, are you !@#$%^&*ing kidding? They have absolutely no regard for Lebanese civilians, they've already killed hundreds! From what you've said in your post, i need not even return the insult. You threw your own !@#$%^&* at the fan.

Terrorists are people who purposefully kill civilians and are fueled by political, racial, ethnic or religious hatred. You have not told me one single thing that can rule Israel out from this definition! Maybe you should open your eyes and realise that the only difference is Israel are powerful enough to do it from the comfort of an organized army. If one side "conducts warfare" with fighter planes and sophisticated weaponry that does not make them less of a terrorist organisation! Is that the only thing causing you to define the Islamists as terrorists! Do you see now why i think you're blind and stupid?!?! Anyone who wants the definition of a hypocrite, look no further! No. You do realise that the proportion of Israeli citizens in the Israeli army is much higher than the proportion of the people who live in the Islamic nations who are terrorists. All there need be is a small percentage of the Israeli army interested in killing civilians and you have an equal level of terrorism. From what we've seen over the last week i would say that most of the Israeli army has no problem killing random civilians. I suppose they justfiy it to themselves by saying that they probably were terrorists... but then again thats probably what the Muslims do too. Bombing the airport, random cars, and random suburbs of Beirut is not at all selective. Would you kill 100 civilians to get to one terrorist? They're firing all the way from Beirut? Wrong, they kidnapped two soldiers didn't they? I would say that the level of destruction to civilian populations on both sides is proportionally equal to the level of military deaths. Israel just blames the civilian casualties on something else. No, you said there was peace and i said that you're full of !@#$%^&* because an enemy will not attack you while they're rebuilding their strength. They're still enemies, just one side is incapable of striking back during the time you're calling peace. I can't believe i have to explain this to your dumb !@#$%^&*. You answered your own question. They want all their land back. However i would theorise that most of these "terrorists" are doing it out of sheer revenge now. Of course i have the right, and so does the rest of the world. As for evidence of Israeli bombing of random cars I initially found the info on the BBC but couldn't find it again so for now i have: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13912000/This shows how a convoy of vehicles was struck (she doens't look like a terrorist), and lower down it tells you how people are waving improvised white flags out of their cars to try and not get bombed. No, its a kidnapping by a terrorist organisation. Its not an act of war from an entire country. Most people would say "read between the lines" but in this case i just want you to learn how to read. I knew you wouldn't be able to resist after i made that last post. You're just too easy.