[IvP] Still more...

[Solauren]

Solauren. could we possibly keep US election politics out of a discussion on war in the Middle East? I mean yes, politics is involved here but Newtie-boy spewing partisan republitard shit doesn't have much to say, other than the old boy will put a my-party spin on anything. We got through WWII with a Democrat in office, I'm not convinced having one now - or a Democratic Congress past this November - is going to make much difference in whether or not the Middle East blows itself to hell.

As you wish

[Surlethe]

Of course, both these “bets” may yet prove sour. Although Israel hopes that making life difficult for the Lebanese will induce them to turn Hezbollah away in resignation, it’s quite possible that it will merely steel them for further resistance. Moreover, in the wake of Fatah’s defeat by the much more stridently anti-Israeli Hamas, it is difficult to imagine politicians in Beirut having any enthusiasm for sending their army to fight Hezbollah for Israel’s security after Israel has essentially wiped the floor with the Lebanese.

I'd say it's far more than probable the bets are going to go sour. This is like having a neighbor who has a nest of termites in his house which are invading your yard, and taking an axe to his house to try to persuade him to deal with the termites.

Saudi Arabia has also been relatively close-lipped – and in fact has not stood as ardently in Lebanese favor as perhaps many in Beirut would have anticipated before the fighting.

Saudi Arabia has effectively disowned Hezbollah in this conflict.

[Elfdart]

However, in strict military terms (which you tap dance around in most threads like you wish you knew) Isreal is attacking legitmate targets.

Link



Jesus' General



Yeah, those look like legitimate targets to me.

[Surlethe]

Let's clear up a bit of terminology, Elfdart. When Knife says "attacking", he means "targeting". You think Israel is bombing civilians for the hell of it?

[Nova Andromeda]

Let's clear up a bit of terminology, Elfdart. When Knife says "attacking", he means "targeting". You think Israel is bombing civilians for the hell of it?

-It is Israel's stated goal to punish Lebanon. They have killed only 4 militants out of ~120 people and they are systematically destroying civilian infrastructure. It's not like they don't have precision guided munitions. Even Hezbolla has a kill ratio of something like 50% military/civilian kills in this fight and they are using 1940's tech. against a a modern army with all kinds of defenses.

[TheMuffinKing]

However, in strict military terms (which you tap dance around in most threads like you wish you knew) Isreal is attacking legitmate targets.

Link



Jesus' General



Yeah, those look like legitimate targets to me.

Note this is totally clinical in its approach...and yes, difficult to deal with: If they were armed, they were legal targets. They became combatants under LOAC (laws of armed conflict).

[Surlethe]

-It is Israel's stated goal to punish Lebanon. They have killed only 4 militants out of ~120 people and they are systematically destroying civilian infrastructure. It's not like they don't have precision guided munitions. Even Hezbolla has a kill ratio of something like 50% military/civilian kills in this fight and they are using 1940's tech. against a a modern army with all kinds of defenses.

Targeting civilian infrastructure is not the same as targeting civilians themselves, and the overwhelming civilian casualties in Lebanon are a result of Israel's application of brute force, not necessarily a policy of targeting Lebanese civilians. If Israel wanted, I'm sure it could actually kill a whole lot more civilians; this suggests to me that Israel is trying to minimize civilian casualties while still maintaining the current level of firepower in play.

[Ace Pace]

Israel has decleared a state of alert that has not been decleared since gulf war one, even in gulf war 2 nothing was at this state of alertness.
Rockets have fallen all over the north, and apprently my mother heard that over 800 rockets have fallen overall. Patriot batteries have been stationed near Israels major cities in the north, probeby mostly to intercept the larger missles that can hit Tel aviv.

Ironiclly, if you are in the capital, you're quite safe as apprently Hizbullah has decleared that they will not target the holy city.

[Ender]

So let me see if I get this straight Keevan - you admit they are legitimate military targets. You agree that taking them out hampers Hezbolla's ability to conduct operations. Yet Israel is still in the wrong for conducting a proper military operation because of the long term consequences? Israel should let them have an easier time fighting them and killing Israeli soldiers because of how things are after the war? And this logic makes sense to you?

Wars of aggression are in and of themselves war crimes, asshole.

Which is irrelvent to my point.

Yay knee-jerk anti-Israel reactionism!

The only "jerk" I see is with your dick between your thumb and index finger at the thought of barbecueing Arabs.

So rather then address my point about the fact that they are attacking legitimate military targets, you go with a strawman about war crimes and a personal attack that,. because I point out that Keevan is using poor reasoning, I must support Israel killing civillians. You do realize that if not for the fact you happen to support the side that most of the board falls on, your ass would have been banned for poor debate tactics long ago, right?

[Ender]

*snip*

Yeah, those look like legitimate targets to me.

Address the point fucker. How are gas stations, communications hubs, and roads not legitimate targets?

[Elfdart]

Of course not. They're killing Lebanese civilians in order to terrorize the people into turning against Hezbollah. This is a time-honored tactic of the redshirts and KKK, who used this rape or that murder as an excuse to terrorize blacks and so-called "nigger lovers" as a whole. It wasn't just to put blacks "in their place" but to make sure nobody else aided them, and made it mandatory to join in for those who didn't want their homes firebombed.

The only differences are that Israeli "terrorism" is much deadlier than that of the Palestinians and Lebanese combined, and that blacks in the South didn't have large quantities of high explosive to fight back with, with more on the way from foreign allies.

[Knife]

Of course not. They're killing Lebanese civilians in order to terrorize the people into turning against Hezbollah. This is a time-honored tactic of the redshirts and KKK, who used this rape or that murder as an excuse to terrorize blacks and so-called "nigger lovers" as a whole. It wasn't just to put blacks "in their place" but to make sure nobody else aided them, and made it mandatory to join in for those who didn't want their homes firebombed.

The only differences are that Israeli "terrorism" is much deadlier than that of the Palestinians and Lebanese combined, and that blacks in the South didn't have large quantities of high explosive to fight back with, with more on the way from foreign allies.

Like Keevan; you've failed to adress the point that if Hezbola is running southern Lebenon, then the infrastructure in southern Lebenon is Hezbola manned targets.

Your crap about showing dead civilians is just that, crap. You don't think there are dead or wounded women and children in Isreal at this point, especially in Haifia? The point is that if the military (whether it be official like the IDF or unofficial like Hezbola) is close to civilian populace or if they both share a piece of infrastructure, you can count on collateral damage. Damn the IDF and damn the Islamifanatics for all their killing.

[Ender]

Of course not. They're killing Lebanese civilians in order to terrorize the people into turning against Hezbollah. This is a time-honored tactic of the redshirts and KKK, who used this rape or that murder as an excuse to terrorize blacks and so-called "nigger lovers" as a whole. It wasn't just to put blacks "in their place" but to make sure nobody else aided them, and made it mandatory to join in for those who didn't want their homes firebombed.

The only differences are that Israeli "terrorism" is much deadlier than that of the Palestinians and Lebanese combined, and that blacks in the South didn't have large quantities of high explosive to fight back with, with more on the way from foreign allies.

So now we get you attacking the character and motivations of random people instead of addressing the point.


How are gas station, communication hubs, and roads not legitimate military targets?

[Nova Andromeda]

-It is Israel's stated goal to punish Lebanon. They have killed only 4 militants out of ~120 people and they are systematically destroying civilian infrastructure. It's not like they don't have precision guided munitions. Even Hezbolla has a kill ratio of something like 50% military/civilian kills in this fight and they are using 1940's tech. against a a modern army with all kinds of defenses.

Targeting civilian infrastructure is not the same as targeting civilians themselves, and the overwhelming civilian casualties in Lebanon are a result of Israel's application of brute force, not necessarily a policy of targeting Lebanese civilians. If Israel wanted, I'm sure it could actually kill a whole lot more civilians; this suggests to me that Israel is trying to minimize civilian casualties while still maintaining the current level of firepower in play.

-You really expect me to believe that load of bullshit!?! Just because Israel hasn't nuked Lebanon yet or dropped cluster munitions on Bereit doesn't mean they aren't targetting civilians or civilian infrastructure (which has the same effect). Israel is clearly trying to turn Lebanon into a waste land unfit for human habitation by wiping out the civilian infrastructure. The tactics and strategy they are using will only strengthen Hizbolla and other insurgent groups and the support for those groups.

[Knife]

-It is Israel's stated goal to punish Lebanon. They have killed only 4 militants out of ~120 people and they are systematically destroying civilian infrastructure. It's not like they don't have precision guided munitions. Even Hezbolla has a kill ratio of something like 50% military/civilian kills in this fight and they are using 1940's tech. against a a modern army with all kinds of defenses.

Targeting civilian infrastructure is not the same as targeting civilians themselves, and the overwhelming civilian casualties in Lebanon are a result of Israel's application of brute force, not necessarily a policy of targeting Lebanese civilians. If Israel wanted, I'm sure it could actually kill a whole lot more civilians; this suggests to me that Israel is trying to minimize civilian casualties while still maintaining the current level of firepower in play.

-You really expect me to believe that load of bullshit!?! Just because Israel hasn't nuked Lebanon yet or dropped cluster munitions on Bereit doesn't mean they aren't targetting civilians or civilian infrastructure (which has the same effect). Israel is clearly trying to turn Lebanon into a waste land unfit for human habitation by wiping out the civilian infrastructure. The tactics and strategy they are using will only strengthen Hizbolla and other insurgent groups and the support for those groups.

You expect us to believe that load of bullshit; that since the IDF is targeting houses with Hezbola manned rocket systems in it, they are in fact targeting civilians?

[Surlethe]

-You really expect me to believe that load of bullshit!?! Just because Israel hasn't nuked Lebanon yet or dropped cluster munitions on Bereit doesn't mean they aren't targetting civilians or civilian infrastructure (which has the same effect). Israel is clearly trying to turn Lebanon into a waste land unfit for human habitation by wiping out the civilian infrastructure.

Where the fuck did you pull that strawman from? I never claimed to advocate the disjunction you have created by pulling this "has the same effect" bullshit out of your ass; that's a red herring (and wrong, too; targeting civilians subsumes targeting civilian infrastructure, but not the other way around), since we're talking about intent instead of effects. Are you simply incapable of differentiating between targeting civilians and targeting things civilians use?

The tactics and strategy they are using will only strengthen Hizbolla and other insurgent groups and the support for those groups.

Damn straight. We agree on this point.

[Elfdart]

Which is irrelvent to my point.

You refer to it as a "proper military operation", fucktard. What's proper about attacking another country as an act of terror? Nothing, you fucking moron.

So rather then address my point about the fact that they are attacking legitimate military targets, you go with a strawman about war crimes

War crimes are the issue you fucking imbecile. Namely, Israel's decision to attack a neighboring country without (a) just cause (as both Keevan Colton and Darth Wong have pointed out, you don't see the British bombing Ireland), or (b) a declaration of war.

and a personal attack that,. because I point out that Keevan is using poor reasoning, I must support Israel killing civillians.

You excuse illegal attacks on another country that are bound to kill large numbers of civilians. Yes, you support killing them whether you're too stupid to notice it or not.

How are gas station, communication hubs, and roads not legitimate military targets?

When the attacks against that country are illegal and unjustified in the first place.

You do realize that if not for the fact you happen to support the side that most of the board falls on, your ass would have been banned for poor debate tactics long ago, right?

So now the mods are abusing their powers just to keep me around because of my politics? Please.


You're just a Stim Neuro wannabe who whines about mods playing politics when he can't argue a point. Fuck off, scumbag.

[Knife]

You refer to it as a "proper military operation", fucktard. What's proper about attacking another country as an act of terror? Nothing, you fucking moron.

And yet, while most of the posters on this thread have lamented the actions of both sides, your rhetoric seems to favor only one team. How legal, as you put it, is the actions of firing missiles over a boarder?

[Nova Andromeda]

You expect us to believe that load of bullshit; that since the IDF is targeting houses with Hezbola manned rocket systems in it, they are in fact targeting civilians?

-All we really know is that the IDF is destroying a huge amount of civilian infrastructure and killing a nearly all civilians (149/162: reuters). If they were actually targetting Hezbola their kill ratio of military/civilian should be much higher than Hezbola's kill ratio since the IDF has precision weapons, vastly superior intel (including realtime rocket launch sites), and well protected troops. Hezbola has to either send in guys with no armor and guns or launch rockets with 0 precision (ratio = 12/24: reuters). Furthermore, it is clear from their military/civilian kill ratio and the attacks on civilian infrastructure that any effect they are having against Hezbola's capabilities will come from hurting the civilians as opposed to the actual combatants. If they really wanted to take on Hezbola they would have to send in ground troops and fight an insurgent war.

[Nova Andromeda]

Are you simply incapable of differentiating between targeting civilians and targeting things civilians use?

-Taking out power, water, roads, etc. cost civilian lives. In fact, it will almost certainly cost far more lives than are killed directly by bombs. Isreal knows this and they must also know that destroying the civilian infrastructure will only have a minimal impact on Hezbola's capabilities (since they are so pathetic to begin with).

[Knife]

You expect us to believe that load of bullshit; that since the IDF is targeting houses with Hezbola manned rocket systems in it, they are in fact targeting civilians?

-All we really know is that the IDF is destroying a huge amount of civilian infrastructure and killing a nearly all civilians (149/162: reuters). If they were actually targetting Hezbola their kill ratio of military/civilian should be much higher than Hezbola's kill ratio since the IDF has precision weapons, vastly superior intel (including realtime rocket launch sites), and well protected troops. Hezbola has to either send in guys with no armor and guns or launch rockets with 0 precision (ratio = 12/24: reuters). Furthermore, it is clear from their military/civilian kill ratio and the attacks on civilian infrastructure that any effect they are having against Hezbola's capabilities will come from hurting the civilians as opposed to the actual combatants. If they really wanted to take on Hezbola they would have to send in ground troops and fight an insurgent war.

Your assuming those kill ratio's are pure civilian rather than unidentified combatents in civilian clotihing. Considering every Tom, Dick, and Muhomad in those parts likes to throw an AK in the air for most occasions, I don't see how any figure so quickly can possibly be believed.


As to this still bullshit claim that destroying obvious infrastructure does nothing but harm civilians rather than hamper enemy movments and such; it would be nice if all badguys from both sides of the boarder would just stand in an open field and be open to attack. Unfortunately, that doesn't happen.

[Elfdart]

You refer to it as a "proper military operation", fucktard. What's proper about attacking another country as an act of terror? Nothing, you fucking moron.

And yet, while most of the posters on this thread have lamented the actions of both sides, your rhetoric seems to favor only one team. How legal, as you put it, is the actions of firing missiles over a boarder?

Obviously it's illegal and immoral. What Israel's fanwhores don't get is that every special pleading furball they cough up would apply to Hezbollah or the other Arab thugs, too. If Israel is justified in attacking Gaza or Lebanon because some of their soldiers are abducted, then Lebanese and Palestinian attacks on Israel are also justified since Israel currently holds thousands of their people, including a large number of children.

[Knife]

You refer to it as a "proper military operation", fucktard. What's proper about attacking another country as an act of terror? Nothing, you fucking moron.

And yet, while most of the posters on this thread have lamented the actions of both sides, your rhetoric seems to favor only one team. How legal, as you put it, is the actions of firing missiles over a boarder?

Obviously it's illegal and immoral. What Israel's fanwhores don't get is that every special pleading furball they cough up would apply to Hezbollah or the other Arab thugs, too. If Israel is justified in attacking Gaza or Lebanon because some of their soldiers are abducted, then Lebanese and Palestinian attacks on Israel are also justified since Israel currently holds thousands of their people, including a large number of children.

Wow, your tapdance shoes are really pretty. How about answering the question now. (edit* I feel compelled to add that, though he did technically answer the question, he immeadiately justified it with bullshit.)

[Elfdart]

Note this is totally clinical in its approach...and yes, difficult to deal with: If they were armed, they were legal targets. They became combatants under LOAC (laws of armed conflict).

You are one dumb twat. How are preschoolers "combatants"? Does Fisher-Price make assault rifles or rocket-propelled grenades?

[Elfdart]

Wow, your tapdance shoes are really pretty. How about answering the question now. (edit* I feel compelled to add that, though he did technically answer the question, he immeadiately justified it with bullshit.)

I'm pointing out that attacks on civilians are not justified, fucktard. Learn to read.