"The fighting was triggered when Hizbollah,...seized two Israeli soldiers

[grahamhgreen]

"Remember what the Western public doesn't know is that a week before the kidnapping of the soldier the Israelis kidnapped a Palestinian doctor and his brother in Gaza, and this goes on all of the time. And I also have to let you know that the Palestinians are convinced, utterly convinced that this whole onslaught really isn't because of the captured soldier. This is a serious attempt by the Israelis to demolish the Hamas government."
<http://64.233.187.104/search?q=cache:3hfYvqwSl-8J:transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0607/03/i_ins.01.html+israel+kidnap+doctor&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=18&client=firefox-a>

CHOMSKY: "Gaza, itself, the latest phase, began on June 24. It was when Israel abducted two Gaza civilians, a doctor and his brother. We don't know their names. You don’t know the names of victims. They were taken to Israel, presumably, and nobody knows their fate. The next day, something happened, which we do know about, a lot. Militants in Gaza, probably Islamic Jihad, abducted an Israeli soldier across the border. That’s Corporal Gilad Shalit. And that's well known; first abduction is not. Then followed the escalation of Israeli attacks on Gaza, which I don’t have to repeat. It’s reported on adequately."
<http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/14/146258>

Does anyone have anything more on this story?

[ThomCat]

1. Right, but a lot of pro-Israel sheep will insist

that everything started with the kidnapping of two soldiers. Israel is never held responsible. Israel is never wrong. Israel is always acting purely in self-defense.
:puke:

[cali]

3. There are people on both sides who

are taking unreasonable positions. The truth is that both Israel and Hamas and H'zbollah have repeatedly acted abominably.

[ThomCat]

23. Very true.

I support the Israel's right to exist, but not their right to kill with impunity. I support their right to defend their borders, but not their land grab beyond their borders. I support Right of Return, but not the treatment of the Palestinians.

If Israel was not a terrorist state I would support Israel a lot more than I do.

[Spazito]

44. I totally agree, I see NO "shining lights" in this horror

none at all, imo.

[cali]

4. self-delete

[cali]

5. self-delete

[question everything]

64. No, it all started last year, when Israel withdrew from Gaza

"Free Gaza" now no longer had a reason to complain about occupation started shelling Israel, even more so when Hamas won the elections.

Hamas and Hezbollah want to eliminate Israel. Period. No, they do not want it to withdraw to the pre-1967 war, or to the UN 1947 partition line (anyone knows what I am talking about here?) They just want it out as part of their desire to spread militant Islam, to return to Islam's the golden ear of the first millennium.

If Israel will cease to exist tomorrow, the jihadists will continue with their terror attacks, only they will have to find another excuse.

[Imperialism Inc.]

65. What withdrawal?

Sure they pulled out of the "useless" areas but they kept everything of value. All the places with water resources and left what is remaining disconnected and surrounded. It is what Chomsky meant by cantonizing in the article linked in the OP. It is a term borrowed from South African apartheid because it is the sane technique used there.

[question everything]

66. Useless? Gaza? With its sand dunes?

I've always envisioned Gaza like Hong Kong (the size is probably comparable).

A tax free city state for tourists and for banks and for a center of trade.

Obviously, it is too small for smoke stack industry or even for agriculture.

And... the West Bank was going to be next. Some settlements were already dismantled. No doubt, the withdrawal from Gaza was going to be a test case to see what happens once the Israeli army is no longer there. Obviously, a failed experiment, which is hurting everyone.

[Imperialism Inc.]

83. No it was simply a gimmick that you apparently have fallen for.

They took all the resources. When they "pulled out" they kept them. They did NOT give them back. The withdrew from nothing.

[Igel]

114. Gaza is Gaza.

It neither decreased from where it ended up in '48, or increased from what it was in '48.

Of course, the population's gone from reasonable to vastly overcrowded.

[jrd200x]

131. Not true. The forcibally removed citizens from their homes

and the neighborhoods were nice. Palastinians, true to form, wrecked and burned everything and now it's a wasteland.

[ProudDad]

85. Israel turned Gaza

into the world's largest PRISON.

It's now Abu-Graib on steriods...

[barb162]

103. And a lot of pro Hamas and pro- Hez sheep will insist

that everything started with ______ (fill in the blank). Hamas and Hez are never held .....

Actually, I think hez was clearly in the wrong in the current situation. Israel hasn't been in Lebanon for years, for pete's sake. They were being provocatuers.

[jrd200x]

130. FInally! Someone that isn't a supporter of Hezz and Hamas

[jrd200x]

129. Gaza and Lebanon are different places aren't they

Pro-Israel sheep? Better than pro-terrorist I should think.

[cgrindley]

2. The current crisis started

With the anti-semitic terrorist organizations Hamas and Hezzbullah being allowed to do pretty much anything that they wanted to. These two groups absolutely have to be stomped out of existence. When will anti-semites get used to the idea that Israel exists and is not about to go away?

[cali]

6. that's a wildly

biased opinion; not a fact.

[cgrindley]

8. Biased? Are you serious?

Hamas and Hezzbullah *are* terrorist anti-semitic organizations. No one on earth doubts that they are fundamentally opposed to the existence of Israel. Both of them routinely take credit for terrorism. Oh, and by the way, fundamental opposition to the existence of Israel = anti-semitism.

[ThomCat]

14. There is a huge difference

between being against Israel and being against Jews. Over-using the claim of anti-semitism to protect Israel's more violent and attrocious activities is monstrous.

Yes, Hamas and Hezzbollah are both involved in terrorism. So is Israel. Israel as a nation is responsible for mass-murder and anti-arab aparteid. If you look at all sides, Israel has been the most violent party.

[cgrindley]

18. I don't think so

I don't think that it is possible to be anti-Israel and not anti-semitic. We're just going to have to agree to disagree.

[ThomCat]

21. A lot of Jewish people (including me)

will disagree with you. Israel does not represent all Jewish people, or all things Jewish. And the actions of state of Israel are not excempt from scrutiny just because they are a Jewish state.

You can disagree, but those are the facts. Dogma is not an appropriate shield.

[cgrindley]

24. Certainly Israel's actions are subject to scrutiny

But you're basically giving Hamas and Hezzbullah a free hand in this. It is possible for Israel occasionally to be in the right about something even if it's something unpleasant.

I still disagree with you about Israel. We'll just leave it at that.

[ThomCat]

30. Disagree? You're calling me an anti-semite

and many other people too, because we're not knee-jerk supporters of Israel. That goes beyond agreeing to disagree. Do you have any justification for such a broad-brush condemnation?

If you can't show how opposing Israel's illegal activities is anti-semetic then you owe a lot of people here an apology.

[cgrindley]

33. No one's calling you an anti-semite

but the general anti-Israeli attitude in this particular forum is cause for some concern. There are a few people here who are the opposite of knee-jerk supporters of Israel. They are knee-jerk detractors of Israel. If you can't the truth in this charaterization, I don't really have anything else to say.

The truth of the matter is that it's a complex matter.

1. I am strongly opposed to Israel's nuclear weapons development
2. I am strongly opposed to Israel's policies towards Palestinians

but

1. I am strongly opposed to Hamas and Hezzbullah and other anti-semitic terrorist organizations
2. In this situation, I think that Israel is doing the right thing

and

1. I can hardly wait for the UN to establish a permanent peace keeping missing in Southern Lebanon.

[leesa]

37. So how are Palestinians supposed to defend themselves against Israeli

aggressions without using "terrorism"?? They have no military. They kill ratio is always higher for Palestinians than it is for Israelis by about 20:1, so just who are the terrorists?

[cgrindley]

38. So are you

suggesting that ETA or the IRA are also in the right?

[ThomCat]

39. You're just not going to admit that Israel

is doing anything wrong, are you? That 20:1 kill ration doesn't bother you at all? Targetting civilians doesn't bother you? Bulldozing homes doesn't bother you?

How much mass-murder are you willing to overlook just because it's Israel doing it?

[The Magistrate]

97. Actually, Sir

In th period of the Second Intafada, the ration fo deaths ahd run about three to one. The ratio you have stated is a considerable overstatement....

"Once you have gilded it, it no longer is a lily."

[Bridget Burke]

46. What about Irgun?

Were they right?

[ProudDad]

87. In some ways YES

Consider...

How would you handle a situation where you are being oppressed and occupied because of your religion or culture by a power you cannot fight in a battlefield and whose transgressions are ignored by the civilized world?

I for one, would fight back with anything I could, in any way I could; until the world finally took notice of the power disparity and did something about it or my oppressor realized that a just peace costs less than oppression...

As England and Spain have learned...

[cgrindley]

91. Wow

You just defended terrorism.

[ProudDad]

92. Nope

I just defended self defense against an occupying force.

Just like the French, etc. did against the Germans in WWII and the Iraq resistance is doing now against another occupier.

[cgrindley]

93. In what way is Israel occupying Lebanon?

You can only be a part of the resistence if there actually is an occupying force occupying your land. In this case, that's just not true. Israel isn't occupying anything in Lebanon (well, maybe by now they are, but they sure weren't on July 12).

[ProudDad]

95. I'm talking about Gaza

but Israel occupied Lebanon for 22 years up until 2000.

Now they're just an invading force...

[The Magistrate]

98. What Your Comments Above Ignore, Sir

Is that it is quite possible to defend against occupation without deliberatel;y targeting enemy civilians. This Israeli army provides plenty of opportunities through check-points, patrols, tec., for irregular attacks to be aimed at soldiers. It is an unfortunare fact that for many years, the militants of Arab Palestine have aimed the bulk of their operations at no objective but the killing of as many civilians as can be contrived. No matter how good a cause may be, it does not by its putative virtue convey a warrant for criminal behavior. Attacks aimed made for the sole purpose of killing civilians are always crimes of war.

[ProudDad]

99. Hell, the Palestinian's learned from the best

The majority of victims of the IDF are Palestinian civilians...

[frankieT]

111. don't forget about the 10000's lebanese civilians Israel killed

during the 1982 war !

[mazzarro]

128. Israel still occupies Sheeba Farms

And had refused returning it to Lebanon since its previous invasion.

[MrPrax]

101. Yes n/t

[barb162]

102. How is each side to defend itself?

[sabbat hunter]

118. it isnt anywhere

near 20:1. please show any findings to back that up.

and it is called peaceful non cooperation. it worked wonders in india.

[jrd200x]

133. They're supposed to use diplomacy

they want to be a country don't they?

[madeline_con]

106. You at least implied it when you said this:

"I don't think that it is possible to be anti-Israel and not anti-semitic."

[Name removed]

74. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[madeline_con]

105. "Dogma is not an appropriate shield" Damn, that's good! n/t

[coalition_unwilling]

43. Have you even bothered to inform yourself about the

activities and views of the "Peace Now" movement in Israel? If not, you thinking Israel is monolithich with regard to these issues but the reality is that it is not -- many Israelis (a minority right now, but still statistically significant) oppose Israel's policies in the occupied Palestinian lands and Israel's current activities in Gaza and Lebanon.

Are those Israelis anti-semitic? Maybe they're "self-hating Jews"?

[sendero]

48. Yeah.......

... forget it

[Igel]

40. You're right, but probably wrong in this instance.

There can be a huge difference between being anti-Israeli and being anti-Jew. But anti-Semitism also finds its natural expression in anti-Israelism.

That they can be different things does not mean, in every case, they are different things.

Hamas, to be honest, isn't really anti-Jew, per se. It's simply so pro-Islam, having everything properly submit in the right way, that it has no choice but to be anti-Jew. Until Jews submit, drop their arrogant claims, and return properly Muslim things to Muslims, acknowledge Muslim supremacy in the area, and return the area to a Muslim majority, they're anti-Jew. Hamas is also anti-Christian, when the Christians get uppity; take the Qalqilya YMCA as an example--the merest suspicion that the YMCA *might* proselytize or sway Muslims, even by just showing a Christian organization in a good light by providing services to Muslims, was grounds for trying to close it. Their attitude is very old, and very well-rooted in the area's history.

[ThomCat]

42. I recognize that.

I don't support any organization that says, "It's our way or we kill you." But right now Israel is the larger problem. Israel is the one entending their borders, destroying towns, building walls and killing people in vast numbers.

The only way to bring down the violence is to start with the biggest, most violent perpetrators. And right now that's Israel.

That has nothing to do with the Jewish religion regardless of Hamas's long term goals.

[Igel]

55. And when it wasn't the larger problem it was still

the main problem.

Much of the world is like Lebanon. Better to let Hezbollah try to kill Israelis in violation of international law--and if they succeed, well, then we'll think about establishing a committee to review the problem. Otherwise it might be messy.

And we don't like messes. Esp. on CNN.

The surprising thing is the sheer number of DUers who don't recognize that Hezbollah is not Hamas, that Hezbollah has little use for Palestinians as such; that they've been making incursions for years, and sending missiles over the borders with some regularity. All they remember is that Israel has bombed S. Lebanon from time to time, or buzzed Beirut or Damascus. It's like the problem just didn't exist until Israel got fed up; then people couldn't figure out why some simple artillery fire is such a big deal.

[robinlynne]

62. Yes, people have said as much. "Hezbollah fires some harmless rockets

into Israel'. I've seen that said more than once here this week.

[robinlynne]

63. Yes, people have said as much. "Hezbollah fires some harmless rockets

into Israel'. I've seen that said more than once here this week.

[jonnyblitz]

49. the far right religious Israelis are racist as hell, too.

like that guy who assassinated Rabin and others like him. They won't be happy until every Palestinian man, woman, and child is dead.

every country has it's far right racist assholes. religion seems to justify it for them. this is why i despise religion so much.

[Totally Committed]

68. Actually, if you take the meaning of "Semitic" (Of Semite),

Both the Israelis AND the Palestinians are Semitic people, so "anti-semitic" is not accurate. I believe to be against the state of Israel makes one anti-Israeli. To be opposed to the Zionists in Israel is to anti-Zionist. But, anti-Semitic does not mean only anti-Jew, but anti all Semitic peoples.

Just a point.

TC

[sabbat hunter]

119. anti semitic

means anti-jewish. that is the accepted definition of antisemitic.

[ProudDad]

86. Right

and fundamental opposition to Al-Qaeda makes you anti-Islam.


You can't have it both ways, bunky.

[Finder]

90. They are semites themselves...

anti-zionist is the term.

[jrd200x]

132. Not really. Both those orgs are terrorist organizations.

Unless you're ok with blowing up kids in discos and pizza parlors.

[ThomCat]

7. What a load.

[TankLV]

76. of TRUTH!

you might not like it, but it's still just the TRUTH.

[gratuitous]

9. What do you think of the report?

If, as reported, Israel is holding at least two Lebanese civilians incommunicado, taken the day before the Israeli soldiers were abducted, does one justify the other? Should folks be "stomped out of existence" for retaliating or trying to redress a wrong done to them? If being allowed to do pretty much anything they want to do justifies being "stomped out of existence," is that a suitable punishment for Israel, which apparently took hostages first? Or is it a reasonable course of action for other countries to follow in relation to, say, what the United States has done in Afghanistan and Iraq, which looks quite similar to doing pretty much anything we want to do?

In other words, if it's sauce for the goose, is it sauce for the gander? And if not, why not?

[cgrindley]

10. WTF

You are aware of Hezzbullah's history, right? This is an organization that should not exist.

[ThomCat]

15. Way to ignore the question.

And who you are you to tell other people that they shouldn't exist? Are you endorsing more mass-murder?

[cgrindley]

19. Hamas and Hezzbullah

Are not people, they are organizations, organizations that should not exist. They shouldn't have any assets, they shouldn't have any office buildings, they shouldn't be on ballots, they shouldn't have any news organizations, and they sure as heck should have any arms. But regardless of that, did you think through your logic, because it doesn't make sense.

EG we could, and should, legislate the end of all oil companies and seize their assets. Such an act would not entail killing everyone who works for Exxon.

[ThomCat]

22. Similarly, the state of Israel is a organisation

that is committing unspeakable acts of terror. Do you care to extend your reasoning in both directions?

[gratuitous]

16. I understand

But just repeating "Hezzbullah" doesn't quite cut it. Since Israel abducted two Lebanese civilians and is holding them incommunicado, does Lebanon have any right to retaliate? Is Lebanon entitled to retaliate in the massive, collective reprisal way that Israel is currently wreaking on Lebanon and Gaza? If not, why not?

I understand you're exercised about Hezzbullah and its mere existence, but what does that have to do with the matter at hand? Or are you here only to repeat "Hezzbullah" as some kind of talisman to be waved to excuse massive bombing of civilian centers by Israel?

[cgrindley]

29. Did you read the article?

Israel did nothing to Hezzbullah to provoke their actions. You might make a claim for Hamas in Gaza, but as far as Lebanon goes, perhaps you should RTFA.

[ThomCat]

32. Kidnapping civilians is not provoking?

Nice blinders you're wearing.

[cgrindley]

34. I still don't understand

So if the US invades Mexico, then Canada should shell the Peace Arch?

Gaza is not in Lebanon. If the people were kidnapped from Gaza, it has nothing to do with Lebanon. The two are on opposite ends of Israel.

[gratuitous]

41. Did you read my post?

Because if Israel kidnapped a doctor and his brother from Lebanon, certain Hezzbullah could regard that as sufficient provocation for abducting an Israeli soldier or two.

Why don't you address my questions instead of swearing and coming quite so unglued?

[eridani]

61. Sure am. I remember very clearly that Hezbollah DID NOT EXIST--

--until Israel invaded Lebanon in 1982.

http://www.thejerusalemfund.org/carryover/pubs/20000901ib.html

With the United States’ refusal to support nonviolent means to force Israel to withdraw, and with a historically weak central government, Lebanese formed their own militias to fight the occupiers. The most significant was Hezbollah, a radical Islamic group composed mostly of Shi’ite Muslims from the farming villages adjacent to Israeli-held territory. Even Lebanese who did not agree with the militia’s fundamentalist ideology saw them as freedom fighters, trying to liberate their country from a foreign military occupation.

Islamic extremists were never much of a factor in Lebanon prior to the 1982 U.S.-backed Israeli invasion and the subsequent direct U.S. military intervention in support of a rightist Lebanese government installed under Israeli guns. During this period, the more moderate Islamic and secular groups were largely destroyed; Hezbollah filled the vacuum.

This fundamentalist movement, which was responsible for the kidnapping of several Americans and other Westerners in the 1980s, rose from obscurity a little more than eighteen years ago to become one of Lebanon’s most powerful political groupings. Hezbollah receives the core of its support from the hundreds of thousands of Lebanese Shi’ites who fled north into the slums of greater Beirut due to years of Israeli attacks.

U.S. officials greatly exaggerated the role of Syria in controlling and supporting Hezbollah. Syria has historically backed the rival Amal militia. The Iranian role was also inflated. These overstatements were largely intended to discredit a genuinely indigenous movement; one which had widespread support for its resistance efforts against a foreign occupation condemned across Lebanon’s diverse communities. The group did not even exist until four years after Israel began its occupation and heavy bombardment of southern Lebanon. Thus, Hezbollah is very much a manifestation of U.S. and Israeli policy. The perception of achieving a military victory, while those advocating a more moderate ideology and a diplomatic solution have failed, has enhanced Hezbollah’s status.

[Lindacooks]

75. Thanks for this. The MSM is, as usual, completely dropping the ball

and simply repeating KKKarl Rove's spin.

[Totally Committed]

69. So, too with the Taliban, the Wahabi,

Hezbollah, Hamas... The White Supremicists, the anti-gay Fundies, Skinheads, the KKK... hate groups are hate groups, and for the U.S. to judge any other country's hate groups when we have not eradicated our own is ludicrous. NONE should exist. You are absolutely right about that. But, they do, and until we eradicate our own, our outrage is simply a lot of arrogance.

America is still a largely racist, sexist, intolerant society. Let's try to wish nothing but peace for all the ME peoples, and do what we can to eradicate hate in our country.

TC

[cali]

25. I think you're getting terribly confused

Chomsky refers to two Palestinianstaken/arrested/captured/whatever from Gaza. Gaza is no where near Lebanon. Before passing judgement you should really try and at least modestly inform yourself.

[gratuitous]

45. So if this is a Gaza incident . . .

Gaza doctor and brother abducted. Gaza takes an Israeli soldier hostage in retaliation. Israel is currently involved in shelling targets in Lebanon, including civilian infrastructure and population centers.

What did I miss? Except for the collective reprisals thing, which I'm pretty sure is still against the Geneva Conventions even if war hasn't been officially declared. Because it's pretty hard to claim the high road when a country is bombing a civilian population that hasn't done anything wrong, can't defend itself, and can't get away.

But as Chris Hedges reported it in his book "War is a Force That Gives Us Meaning," this isn't anything all that new:

The conflict between the Israelis and the Palestinians has left each side embracing death. They each believe that they are the only real victims. There is a celebration of suicidal martyrdom and justification of the tit-for-tat killing of noncombatants.

On a recent trip to the region, I visited the Khan Younis refugee camp in the Gaza Strip. As the searing afternoon heat and swirling eddies of dust enveloped the camp, I sought cover, slumping under the shade of a palm-roofed hut on the edge of the dunes. I was momentarily defeated by the grit that covered my face and hair, the jostling crowds, the stench of the open sewers and rotting garbage.

Barefoot boys, clutching ragged soccer balls and kites made out of scraps of paper, squatted a few feet away under scrub trees. Men, in flowing white or gray galabias -- homespun robes -- smoked cigarettes outside their doorways. They fingered prayer beads and spoken in hushed tones as they boiled tea or coffee on sooty coals in small iron braziers in the shade of the eaves. Two emaciated donkeys, their ribs outlined on their flanks, were tethered to wooden carts with rubber wheels.

It was still. The camp waited, as if holding its breath. And then, out of the dry furnace air a disembodied voice crackled over a loudspeaker from the Israeli side of the camp's perimeter fence.

"Come on dogs," the voice boomed in Arabic. "Where are all the dogs of Khan Younis? Come! Come!"

I stood up and walked outside the hut. The invective spewed out in a bitter torrent. "Son of a bitch!" "Son of a whore!" "Your mother's {expletive deleted}!"

The boys darted in small packs up the sloping dunes to the electric fence that separated the camp from the Jewish settlements abutting it. They lobbed rocks towards a jeep, mounted with a loudspeaker and ptrotected by bulletproof armor plates and metal grating, that sat parked on the top of a hill known as Gani Tal. The soldier inside the jeep ridiculed and derided them. Three ambulances -- which had pulled up in anticipation of what was to come -- lined the road below the dunes.

There was the boom of a percussion grenade. The boys, most no more than ten or eleven years old, scattered, running clumsily through the heavy sand. They descened out of sight behind the dune in front of me. There were no sounds of gunfire. The soldiers shot with silencers. The bullets from M-16 rifles, unseen by me, tumbled end-over-end through their slight bodies. I would see the destruction, the way their stomachs were ripped out, the gaping holes in their limbs and torsos, later in the hospital.

I had seen children shot in other conflicts I have covered - - death squads gunned them down in El Salvador and Guatemala, mothers with infants were lined up and massacred in Algeria, and Serb snipers put children in their sights and watched them crumple onto the pavement in Sarajevo -- but I had never watched soldiers entice children like mice into a trap and murder them for sport.

Op cit at 92-94 (emphasis added).

[bullimiami]

11. well i not only vehemently oppose your position.

I am offended by your lack of knowledge.

It so happens that both the Arabs and Jews are semitic peoples.

[cgrindley]

27. Oh dear

Anti-semitic only means anti Jewish and you know it. To argue otherwise beggars belief. No one on earth would claim that anti-semitism meant that one was bigoted against people of Arabian descent. No one. It is a feeble semantic argument.

Look, I'll shut up on this issue, but I have to say that the anti-semitism I'm hearing is pretty astonishing.

[ThomCat]

31. Anti-semitic only means anti Jewish

And yet, earlier you insisted that anti-semetic means anti-Israel.

I guess you haven't thought this through very thoroughly. :eyes:

[cgrindley]

35. Israeli = Jewish

It is the Jewish homeland. If something is anti-Israeli, then it's more than likely anti-Israeli based on an anti-Jewish or anti-semitic philosophy. If you want, you can try to tell me that Israel's neighbors' hatred has nothing to do with religion and are only about land.

[ThomCat]

36. It's also the Palistinian homeland.

The real world sucks that way.

But even so, Israel is not Judaism. Judaism is not Israel. The two can exist without each other, and did for many centuries.

Insisting that any criticism of Israel is a criticism of Judaism is very shallow, and shows a lack of understanding of both religion and politics.

[TankLV]

78. And it was the Jewish Kingdom of Israel before it was Palestine.

Thousands of year before.

We know our history too.

Seems it was Jewish for a lot longer that it's been muslim - seeing that muslims are only about a thousand year old religion...

But who am I to stand in the way of a good diatribe against the Jews in favor of the "poor muslims"...

[ProudDad]

88. And before the Jews showed up behind Moses

and committed Genocide; wiping out the indigenous inhabitants of the area (on orders from their god), there were many other peoples living in that area too that had a prior claim.

What a silly statement you've just made.

[Andromeda]

104. That's false.

The Romans appointed Herod as King of the Jews some time before the birth of Christ. Herod was a deranged murderer who had three of his wifes killed and even killed some of his children. After hearing of the pending birth by the Magi (three wisemen) of the baby Jesus in Bethlehem, Herod ordered all male children under the age of two years, killed. Herod did not want to be displaced as King of the Jews and dispatched assassins to murder the Christ child. What he did not know is that Jesus had been born about eight months prior to the arrival of the Magi. They left the gifts and returned to their home in Persia, avoiding Jerusalem, and King Herod, on their way back.

Jews did not commit "genocide" and there was no order from "their god" to do so. The Roman, Pontius Pilate told Herod to eliminate Jesus. Jesus, himself a Jew, was saved when Joseph and Mary fled to Egypt.

Jew were also "indigenous" to the area and there was no conspiracy to wipe out other indigenous people who lived in that area.

[bullimiami]

58. you are confusing opposition to israeli policy and actions with

prejudice against jews.

they are clearly seperate issues.

some of the people who harbor the most vile prejudice are more than willing to partner up with the right wing israeli contingent and their neocon supporters (religion nonwithstanding) in this country.

im pro an israel that makes me proud of the example they set. what good is the land if you have to sell your souls to have it?

[snappyturtle]

12. Your statement is part of the problem......

I used to think the Israelis were the ones trampled, pushed, shoved....always looking for a land they could call their own. Well, since 1948 they have a home.....but they don't play well with others. They're aggressive and occupiers of what little the Palestinians have left. If you check into the situation you will find it's Israel who has done most of the killing. Israel has nuclear weapons and all kinds of U.S. made munitions, planes, tanks etc. It's like the Palestinians are Boy Scouts fighting the U.S. Army (Israel).

So what if the Palestinians nabbed a few soldiers.....they're soldiers and that was AFTER the Gaza citizens were abducted. The Israeli response is out of proportion to the deed. Think about it: What if the U.S. had bombed Iran in the 80's when they held the American hostages? It is not a reason to start a war.....in Israel's case, it's an excuse.

[cali]

47. It's discouraging how little DUers know about this topic

And the manichean view they have on it is just simple to the point of mindless. There's a ton of fault on both sides. I hold Israel to greater account because they have the power, but anyone who's really read, from a variety of viewpoints, the history of this mess, knows that there's plenty of blame to spread around- from Great Britain to Jordan and Egypt. For example, the Jordanians occupied the West Bank for 19 years, why wasn't a Palestinian nation formed then?

[ThomCat]

53. Wow. I agree with your post.

I agree 100% :)

That's a bit scary.

Actually, I agree with a lot of what you say. But given the intractable positions in these discussions it's kind of funny.
:)

[alvarezadams]

13. Alternative:

You wrote: The current crisis started with the anti-semitic terrorist organizations Hamas and Hezzbullah being allowed to do pretty much anything that they wanted to. These two groups absolutely have to be stomped out of existence. When will anti-semites get used to the idea that Israel exists and is not about to go away?"

Someone not so biased on the Israeli POV could say:

The current crisis started with the anti-Arab ultranationalist state terrorists (Israel) being allowed to do pretty much anything that they wanted to. This group absolutely has to be stomped out of existence. When will anti-Arabs get used to the idea that the Palestinians have a right to a state and are not about to go away?

Both statements have a kernel of truth and if one goes to the legal justification of either side (with respect to the sovranty over "Palestine"), the Palestinians have a far better case. As Arthur Koestler wrote, the Balfour Declaration (that is the basis for an Israeli state) amounted to "one nation solemnly promised to a second nation the country of a third."

FWIW, both Arabs AND Israelis are Semitic.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cgrindley]

20. How dare you

I am a loyal progressive liberal and have been since I became voting age. I have worked on campaigns in Canada. I have donated to the Democratic party here (although I'm not allowed to vote) and I have a lawn sign for the upcoming primary. I work at a public university and have dedicated my life to helping people.

You're calling me a troll because I support Israel's right to hit Hamas and Hezzbullah?

[alvarezadams]

26. "RIGHT"???

According to international law, the only legal war is in self-defense. It must be proportionate to the attack received.

Yet this applies to nations and not to groups. One nation's terrorists are another's "freedom fighters" (as we Americans should well know).

At best the way to combat terrorism is not through an eye-for-an-eye. The use of military force against terrorists puts both the nation and the terrorists on the same level: by using the military the nation is according a de facto belligerent status on the terrorists (making them de jure equals), by using disproportionate force it is also morally lowering itself to the level of the terrorists.

The only way to counter terrorism is to apply LAW, both domestic and international, and to remove the perceived pretexts that makes terrorism "attractive". Terrorists (suicide bombers or governments) are criminals.

It is a pity that the West in general and the US/Israel in particular have seen fit to eviscerate international law and the structure designed in 1945 to apply it (the UN). Short-term expediency, the desire for simplistic and populistic solutions to complex problems and special interests have all contributed to both the weakening of international law and the creation of terrorism.

I do not defend either side. Here's my solution: http://journals.democraticunderground.com/alvarezadams/14

[FormerDem06]

50. So then does

At best the way to combat terrorism is not through an eye-for-an-eye.

--------------------------------------------------------------

The current approach account for the past 5 years of Suicide Bombers and rocket attacks from Gaza and before that Lebanon on a daily basis? Just curious.

[alvarezadams]

56. The curren approach...

HAS been "an eye-for-an-eye".

[FormerDem06]

51. I read your solution and I like some of it...

Not a bad set of bullet points:

===================================================================================
1. Israel should unilaterally or bilaterally withdraw from all occupied territories (with the possible exception of Golan), fomenting the creation of a fully independent Palestinian state, with fair rights to water, etc.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who owns Jerusalem and the Temple/Mosque Mount? The Jews built there originally in 950 BC and it stood for 410 years, the second temple was built and the Romans tore it down in 70 BC. Islamic Invaders didn't put up the mosque there until 720 AD. That is going to be a point of contigency forever I think.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. The UN, US and EU should undertake to guarantee the integrity of the resulting STATES, providing (if necessary) a neutral force that would guard the frontiers until a peaceful status quo is reached.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also doable. As long as Syria and that nutjob in Iran can stay out of it. The guy believes he is here to bring their savior out of a well to take Jesus to Mecca and teach him to pray. I don't think reason will work here.
Syria seems to be the more even minded of the two.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. The UN, US and EU should undertake to provide aid on the proviso that international law is respected by both sides.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I personally feel that this might work if the business interests of all involved are ignored. All Iran has to do is tell China no more oil unless you support us in this mess and China will protect thier own interests and undermine the UN, as they have done on countless occassions with both Iran and N. Korea.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. All parties should agree to cooperate in the CRIMINAL pursuit of subsequent terrorist activities by all sides.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AMEN!!!!! I'd love to see it happen
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[ThomCat]

52. If it is possible to get everything else on that list,

the criminal prosecution is still going to be a sticking point. You just know that only the palestinians would be investigated. It's already true that only one side are called terrorists. That wouldn't change.

Israel would continue to ignore their own attrocities, and I don't imagine that the Palestinians would have any faith in Israeli justice.

[TankLV]

79. Funny, but I NEVER see or hear of any Israeli's secretly planting bombs on

on busses in muslim cities, or indescrimintly shooting and targeting of innocent CIVILIAN targets in "peacetime".

Or just suddenly begin to shell muslim or arab cities thousands of miles distant, without warning or provocation.

NEVER.

But go ahead, continue to defend the indefensible...

[ProudDad]

89. They don't have to

They just fly over in their F-16s and fire rockets. Or send in a bunch of tanks and bulldozers to level people's homes (and the occasional American citizen). Or fire artillery into defenseless neighborhoods.

Or starve a people by bombing their electric plant...

------------------------------------------------------

You still can't see the power imbalance, can you?

Peace is primarily ISRAEL'S RESPONSIBILITY. They have the power... They just haven't got the guts it takes to make peace.

It's easy to wage war, it takes courage to make peace.

[alvarezadams]

57. Alternatives

1. Since it is clear that three religions have a "stake" in the area and that it cannot be divided, why not an "international zone" - with Jerusalem being controlled by the UN similarly to how Washington DC is run by Congress... or similar to the situation in Tangier between wars.

[cali]

28. calling people a troll

because you disagree with their opinions is not OK.

[Lindacooks]

59. Advocating genocide, are you?

You can't 'stomp groups out of existence' - that's a repuke talking point that is absolutely false.

[McCamy Taylor]

54. Fighting triggered when Bush-Cheney decided endless war good politics

You guys need to step back and look at the total picture here. One kidnapping on one side or the other did not start this. The BIG players are the US, Saudi Arabia, Iran, China maybe a few other world powers.

Saudi Arabia's royal family keeps its control on its nation's oil and wealth by giving its people something else to hate---Israel.

The Bush-Cheney cabal breaks the law in the US and justifies its mad power grab and its pillage of the US government coffers as well as providing necessart media distraction by poking the middle east with a stick in order to achieve a near constant state of mideast war.

Iran wants to be the big power in the Middle East, its China or Russia, so it will play one side against another and bide its time.

China needs oil and will deal with whomever it thinks can give it a steady supply, and it will support whichever side it thinks will achieve peace and stability and a steady production of oil in the middle east in the long run--right now it is betting on Iran.


More than likely what happened last week was...

Cheney, Rove and Libby were staring at the Plame lawsuit which they knew was coming because the three year statute of limitations was approaching, they saw the tensions in Gaza heat up, Cheney got on the phone and told Israel "If you guys want to take care of your Hezbollah problem right now once and for all, the US has got your back." All Cheney wanted was a bunch of blood and death in the middle east to fill the front pages of newspapers so no one would talk about the Plame lawsuit. What Israel got for believing him was a bloodly mess and the condemnation of much of the world for its excessive response to the kidnapping of some soldiers.

This scenerio does not require a massive NeoCon conspiracy that was planned for months with spies in Hezbollah. All it takes is one phone call done on the spur of the moment on a whim from a scared VP. And it conforms to the pattern of how Bush-Cheney have used the middle east for political purposes for the last 6 years.

[alvarezadams]

60. Big players?

You mention some countries - but in the end these countries share a similar political ideology in the sphere of foreign policy and are all driven by a "greater evil", laissez faire jockeying for resources and profit.

If you erase the names of the countries you cited and, for example, replaced them with the names of certain oil companies or assorted corporate concerns... your comments would make even more sense. And if you add the socioeconomic component that lays below the surface of the "grass roots extremism", the picture becomes even clearer.

I'm not railiing against capitalism but against its exagerated form that is currently in vogue. Corps virtually rule nations these days and pervert the electoral process. At the same time, the neolib economic agenda exacerbates the economic disparity between the haves and have-nots both domestically and internationally.

Since the fall of communism the ideological "debate" (for what it's worth) has become less diverse. Hardly anyone is pointing out the true problems or propounds solutions that go beyond authoritarian, draconian or violent measures. "Social justice" is lost behind the rhetoric of "xxxx needs to become competitive" (xxxx being any country anywhere), which translates into more social injustice.

Communism is dead. And in the absence of Communism, extremist capitalism is returning to where it was before it was coerced into providing a modicum of social justice for the masses. No more threat? Let's go back to the bad old days of pre-New Deal laissez faire. What? That was what made Communism (amongst other -isms) an attractive alternative in the past? Nanananana, I CAN'T HEAR YOU.

[grahamhgreen]

70. I think you're on the right track. The media reports this

as "Israeli soldiers kidnapped", therefore "Israel must defend herself", when it appears as if it was, perhaps, the kidnapping of the Palestinian doctor and his brother who 'started' this, this time. The Bush/Saudi/media cabal seems to be spurring this war on, not only to deflect attention from problems at home, but also for profit in arms sales, and to jack up the price of oil. It is hard to believe that, at the end of the day, the only resolution to this issue can and will be all of the people of the mideast living side by side, in peace.

[leftofthedial]

67. Noone remembers who "started it."

Their ancestors were killing one another in that region when the only weapons were rocks. I daresay they'll still be killing one another when the only weapons left are rocks.

I just wish they'd hurry up and get it over with and kill everyone involved--put them all out of our misery. A pox on all of them. There are no "good guys" anywhere in that region.

The whole "they started it" approach to rationalizing millenia-old ethnic and religious hatred is absurd.

[alvarezadams]

72. For over 1000 years

the region lived in relative peace inasmuch as the 3 monotheistic religions are concerned.

As for your deathwish, can't you see how revolting such a thought is? From abroad, might someone not look at US and say that "given that they've been in an almost continuous state of war for over a century, I hope they blow themselves up instead of fvcking with the rest of the world"?

[leftofthedial]

73. from abroad?

I say that about the US from right here

As for the relative peace, for about 1000 years most of the Jews were gone, the Muslims and Christians spent almost the entire time trying to subjugate and colonize and kill one another (you know, little things like the Crusades, the Muslim conquest of the Balkans, the conquest and loss of Moorish Spain, the Inquisition, the colonization of the entire region by England and France . . .).

Their hatred obviously goes deeper than anyone's ability to reason. I say get that fundy, intolerant reservoir of defective primate wiring out of the gene pool.

[alvarezadams]

77. Strange

You're knowledge of history is remarkably vague or you have chosen to understand my comments in a way that I had not intended.

I refered to the spirit of toleration that indeed existed for over a millenium.

As for your comments:

1. Most of the Jews were indeed gone from Palestine, but the ME had been full of them since Hadrian's time and indeed earlier.
2. The Muslims conquered the region in the space of a few years and were remarkably tolerant of Christians and Jews.
3. You point out the Crusades as an example of hatred - even though it was CHRISTIAN hatred.
4. Muslim Spain was renowned for its tolerance.
5. The Inquisition was a purely Christian concept and was exercized only against Christians.

So when you speak of intolerant fundie hatred... it seems that you've misidentified it, at least from an historical perspective.

[leftofthedial]

81. vague?

Every example I gave you was an example of religious and/or ethnic violence in the region or stemming from the region. I don't care if it's christ worshipers, allah worshipers or Flying Spaghetti Monster worshipers--all these fundies are dangerously religiously insane. Whether for religious, ethnic or nationalistic reasons, they have been killing one another since they lived in caves. They show no sign of stopping and no legitimate desire for peace.

If you've assumed for some reason that I'm defending Christians, you are barking up the wrong tree.

Your "tolerant" Muslims have managed to kill an awfully huge number of non-Muslims, Muslims of slightly different doctrinal subspecies, and ethnic or national rivals over the last 1000 years. In fact, in the past few years in only one country, Iraq, at least 39,000 of them have died, the majority in acts of "civilian" violence. Hmm. Seems the Sunnis and Shiites began killing one another about 1400 years ago and still haven't stopped! About a million and a half Armenians probably wouldn't share your definition of "tolerance either. Nor would the tens or possibly hundreds of thousands of non-Muslims killed in the Muslim conquest of the Balkans. Gee, I seem to "vaguely" recall that religious and ethnic factors were involved in the bloodletting in the Balkans in the 90's.

Your statement that the Inquisition's only victims were Christians is ignorant beyond description.

I wish that father of evil, Abraham, had never been born. All his children are psychopaths.


on edit: my apologies to FSM worshipers. It was wholly unjustified to lump you in with those other insane idiots.

[alvarezadams]

82. Thanx for the clarification

I tend to agree that the followers of the Western monotheistic religions tend to be a bloody-minded lot. It's hard to name a country outside Switzerland, Andorra and Monaco that haven't been in at least one highly destructive war per generation. Of course, we are one of the worst offenders - often times waging more than one war at a time (like now).

As for the Inquisition - I'm afraid you're wrong. At least the Spanish Inquisition had no power whatsoever over non-Christians - the Jews and Muslims "relaxed" by it had at least superficially converted to Christianity and were thus apostates. If they had never converted at all they would have been free of the Inquistion's oppression (but not of the oppression of the state).

Before you call someone ignorant, make sure you know what you're talking about.

[FormerDem06]

100. The muslims had an interesting way of forcing people to convert....

2. The Muslims conquered the region in the space of a few years and were remarkably tolerant of Christians and Jews.

===========================================================================

They were tolerent in that they allowed them to live. When I was writing my senior thesis in college I discovered, that as Islam advanced through Jerusalem and then on to Northern Africa the following occured:

1. Believers in Judaism and Christianity were forced to worship in secret. Doing otherwise caused offense to many male believers and could cause problems.
2. Non-believers in Islam had no rights under Islamic laws, therefore a believer could take your land, commit acts against your wife, etc. etc. and you had no recourse. But if you took action against a believer, death awaited you.
3. Non-believers were taxed (called the jizyah), and were not allowed to own land over a certain amount.
4. Non-believers were forced to dress in a certain way to show their non-Islamic status.

These are just the four biggest dis-incentives to false conversion. So the rulers of the time, conquered by the sword, and then made life so uncomfortable for the conquered that they were forced to convert to Islam just to survive in the new society.

Interestingly though, the instances of conversions at sword-point were not as prevelant as one might think.

[Name removed]

71. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[norml]

80. The P-Word (huffingtonpost.com)

The P-Word (35 comments )
07.16.2006
READ MORE: Iraq, Israel, George W. Bush, Lebanon

Is Palestine.

And the discussion of Zionism for what it is -- exactly as we are witnessing right now -- a secular, racist political movement, characterized by expansionism and militarism , is going to have to happen online, because neither the mainstream press nor mainstream politicians will touch it with a ten-foot pole... even when it is piling up more bodies as it leads the world into a regional disaster.

Let's just get something out of the way right up front, before I go any further. Zionism is not Judaism; being Jewish does not make anyone Zionist; and anti-Zionism is not equivalent to anti-Semitism.

It is now well past time for the United States to withdraw all rogue state, Israel; though that is unlikely to happen without a movement to make it happen, because the US is now effectively the biggest and most dangerous rogue state on the planet.

Democrats won't touch this issue for the same reason they avoid that other P-Word, Prison. They are as complict in the incarceration of 2 million people here -- mostly of color -- as they are in the continuing support of the terror state of Israel.

So let's just talk briefly about what Zionism actually is, and get away from the mythology promoted by and AIPAC.


snip


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stan-goff/the-pword_b_25144.html

[Name removed]

84. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cgrindley]

94. I'm calling Godwin on this one

You realize that comparing Israel to Nazi Germany is incredibly offensive?

[ProudDad]

96. Another of bush's wars

"The US is giving Israel a window of a week to inflict maximum damage on Hizbullah before weighing in behind international calls for a ceasefire in Lebanon, according to British, European and Israeli sources.

The Bush administration, backed by Britain, has blocked efforts for an immediate halt to the fighting initiated at the UN security council, the G8 summit in St Petersburg and the European foreign ministers' meeting in Brussels."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,1823817,00.html

What's next, Iran?

[jack bauer]

107. Someone please show me where I am wrong.

If you disarm Hezbollah there would be peace.
If you disarm Israel there would be slaughter.

There are extremists that want you dead. They want me dead. They want Christians dead, Jews dead, incorrect Muslim sects dead.

These are the people that are at war all over the world. Hezbollah, Hamas, Al Quaeda, insurgents, PLO, etc. The names change the common goal remains the same.

These people target civilians. They target them in Muslim weddings, at night clubs, at pizza shops, on buses, on trains, on roadsides. They target men, women, children. They target them in India, in Japan, in Iraq, in Indonesia, in the Philipines, in the Sudan. There is little regard for who they kill, just as long as they kill.
If possible, they will saw the heads off of people, while they scream, beg for mercy.

Please make no mistake about it, these people want you dead. Dead because of your religion, dead because of your lack of religion, dead because you may be shiite, or sunni, or sufi, or Wahhabi, or Christian, or because you live in a modern culture, because your women don't cover their face. dead because of rock music. dead because they just really like the idea of 72 virgins.

Yes, Even their most ardent American defenders, they want you dead too, and the people you hate the very most, are working every day, to make damn sure that doesn't happen.

If those beliefs make me a right wing kool-aid drinker, fine. Pass some over, I prefer lime, but grape is ok too.

[breakaleg]

108. Your basic premise is flawed...

No one is saying you should disarm Israel. We say that Israel should show restraint with their weapons. We are saying Israel should not abuse those weapons and power they posses. We are saying Israel should not be allowed to commit the atrocities they have been committing on the Palestinians and the Lebanese.

So, if we don't disarm Israel, then there will be no slaughter. And it's false to say that IF you disarmed Israel there COULD be slaughter, since disarming Israel is NEVER going to happen.

You are talking about the opinions of a few extremists and holding their entire race or culture responsible for their beliefs. Not every Palestinian or every Lebanese agrees with Hamas or Hezbollah. They don't all share the same beliefs.

Here is your kool-aid - lime.

[ShortnFiery]

116. Unfortunately "these people" are well represented on BOTH sides

of the waring parties.

BTW :wtf: is AMERICA doing in the Middle East? I'm sickened by the notion that we are to "train and ARM Lebanon" again.

Can we say, "ENDLESS War Profiteering?" :puke:

Oh my dear Lord, Please stop this ride (ventures in the Middle East), I want the USA Military to please GET OFF!

[4dsc]

109. Israeli were in Lebanon when captured

I believe the whole corporate controlled media is failing to mention this little fact.. The Israeli's were in Lebanon when they were captured..

[pelsar]

110. actually they were in israel...

the two humvees that were attacked were shown on israeli TV commercial TV several times with israeli soldiers walking around (an impossibility in Hezballa controllled S. Lebanon)

Two humvees in the middle of the day wouldnt get more than a meter in lebanon, the border was heavily guarded by hizballa,(nor would israel send in two jeeps...that would be suicidal)

and the two taken were reservists.....another sign that it was no more than a mere border patrol unit.

"sorry for ruining a good conspiracy plan"...and of course it was hardly the first time Hizballala attempted to kidnap israelis on border patrol duty....

[4dsc]

112. You're easily convinced

Actually the Israeli troops were in Lebanon..

http://www.forbes.com/technology/feeds/ap/2006/07/12/ap2873051.html

The militant group Hezbollah captured two Israeli soldiers during clashes Wednesday across the border in southern Lebanon, prompting a swift reaction from Israel, which sent ground forces into its neighbor to look for them.

The forces were trying to keep the soldiers' captors from moving them deeper into Lebanon, Israeli government officials said on condition of anonymity.

[pelsar]

113. or you could try the BBC

Lebanese guerrillas have captured two Israeli soldiers in a cross-border raid, triggering the first Israeli land incursion into the country since 2000.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5171616.stm
_______________
or
Al-Manar also broadcast video clips of previous Palestinian and Lebanese attacks on IDF troops.

"Fulfilling its pledge to liberate the prisoners and detainees, the Islamic Resistance... captured two Israeli soldiers at the border with occupied Palestine," the Syrian- and Iranian-backed Hezbollah said in a statement.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/737634.html
__________________
or haartez

the militants attacked two IDF armored Hummer jeeps patrolling along the border
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/737634.html

________

but like i mentioned: israeli reservists do border patrol and jeeps dont enter hizballa territory in the middle of the day...but hey, thats just simple military common sense.

[Name removed]

115. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[pelsar]

117. you've got to be kidding?

in the middle of the day,....two humvees driving through the thick of hizballa territory where there are low bushes visability for kilometers?

somebody neither knows the territory, the methodology nor geography.....and i doubt you have any experience in any ground armed forces....

(no helicopter support..a standard for the area...)

any other fantasies...maybe they were mossad?

[MrPrax]

120. It was night n/t

[pelsar]

121. morning....

Two Israelis were wounded when gunmen in Lebanon began pounding the IDF's Zarit position and other posts along the border before 9 A.M. According to Al-Manar, Hezbollah kidnapped the two IDF soldiers at 9:05 A.M. and transferred them to a safe location

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/737634.html

[MrPrax]

122. From your link:

"The army withheld news of the deaths for several hours while the soldiers' families were notified."

Oh and the old Haaretz story at the time of the attack!:

"...The fighting began at about 9:00 A.M., when a group of reserve soldiers in two armored jeeps was conducting a routine patrol of the border. As the jeeps passed between Moshav Zarit and Moshav Shtula, Hezbollah attacked.

An initial inquiry revealed that the Hezbollah operatives had crossed the border earlier via a "dead zone" in the border fence not visible from any of the IDF lookout posts. There are dozens of similar "dead zones" along the northern border, though the IDF said that lookout cameras to cover this particular spot were due to be installed next week. The assailants may have used a wheeled ladder to climb over the fence.

The operatives hid themselves in an overgrown wadi about 200 meters on the Israeli side of the fence and waited until the IDF troops arrived, whereupon they attacked, apparently with a combination of explosives and antitank missiles.

Three soldiers were killed during the initial assault, while one soldier was seriously wounded, another lightly wounded and a third suffered a shrapnel scratch. In addition, the assailants kidnapped two soldiers, whose medical condition is unknown. According to the IDF, Hezbollah probably had an escape vehicle waiting on the other side of the fence. The entire incident took no more than 10 minutes, and the Israeli soldiers apparently never fired a shot.

....

According to GOC Northern Command Udi Adam, the IDF had no intelligence warnings of the Hezbollah attack. After Shalit was kidnapped, he said, the army decided to up the alert level in the north for fear of a similar attack, but a few days ago, the alert was lowered again.

Haaretz from July 14th

Broad daylight, huh, with a wheeled ladder, an escape car and all sorts of stuff?

The 'new' version from August 1, 2006 seems to have removed some of the weird 'keystone cops' aspects of the original version because if one when through the original, one would find a lot of contradictions...like the timeline and the lack of 'precise' location.

Yeah and Israel did send a team into Lebanon BTW ;-)

[pelsar]

123. on the israeli side during the day..

whats the problem?...the whole article explains what more or less happend..on the israeli side of the border:

the fighting was at 9:00am (thats daylight) lasted a few minutes...(still daylight)..

hizballa obviously went in at night and waited for the morning patrol...but the actual attack was in israel during the morning.

whats your point?
4dsc claimed the the israelis were in lebanon, they werent.

and i hate to "break it to you"...but that initial version is not only plausible but very probable...its not the first time israeli border patrols have been ambushed

[4dsc]

125. Oh really??

You claimed"its not the first time israeli border patrols have been ambushed..

Can you tell us the LAST time Israeli's were ambushed by Hezbollah on the Israeli side of the border in Northern Israel??

[pelsar]

126. dont know much about Hezballa?

In 2000, Hizballah took 3 israeli soliders from the border area...same methodoloyg...returned the bodies later in an exchange


21 Nov 2005 - An attempt to kidnap an IDF soldier near Rajar village, the village is divided in two, the HIzballa unit (had several types of cars, antitank weapons etc...well planned attacked planned....they were killed


civilians:
7 Apr 2005 - Two Israeli-Arabs from the village of Rajar near the Israel-Lebanon border were kidnapped by Hizballah operatives and held in captivity for four days. Muki Ben-Jamal and Nuef Maharj Ben-Ali, They were later released.

and numerous bombs planted along the border over the years and general sniping killing patrol members:
9 Jan 2005
7 May 2004
19 Jan 2004
6 Oct 2003
20 Jul 2003

http://daledamos.blogspot.com/2006/07/mitchell-bard-hizballah-terrorist.html

[4dsc]

124. No kidding..

They were sent into Lebanon to see what kind of reaction they would get from Hezbollah and they found out!! I'm sure this wasn't the first time they entered Lebanon to test the reaction of Hezbollah, only this time thing went very wrong..

[pelsar]

127. confusing hamas with the IDF....

the IDF doesnt send its members on suicide missions.....sending two jeeps into hezballa land during daylight hours for a "reaction"......duh....did the IDF expect to get their passports checked?


come on..think of something a little more imaginative.....

(and your map?...in real life, they wouldnt have gotten more than 10 meters in .....without being blown up...thats what happens when you have hizballa outposts on the actual border

(or were the Hizballa outposts (usually between 5-15 yards tall) were suddenly blind and somehow missed two noisey humvees entering either on a dirt path with all its dust or perhaps going slowly up hill on the rocky cross country area (ever here a jeeps engine 'whine" when going up hill?....pretty noisey, pretty sucidial in an area filled with anti tank weapons....)

sometimes you just have to know what the area looks like or have some experience in the field to know simple facts....and for those that dont, seems anything will do:

"scotty beam me up"