The latest Hizbollah killings of Israelis show the Lebanese died in vain

[bigtree]

Hizbollah rockets kill 7 in Israel

Thu Aug 3, 2006 10:50am ET169

MAALOT, Israel (Reuters) - Hizbollah rockets killed seven people in northern Israel on Thursday, in one of the most lethal barrages launched by the Lebanese guerrilla group since fighting began more than three weeks ago.

The deaths, in the cities of Acre and Maalot, raised to 26 the number of people killed by rocket fire from Lebanon during the current conflict.

More than 100 rockets were fired in the late afternoon barrage, killing seven people and wounding dozens, police said.

The salvoes were another sign the guerrilla group was still a potent threat to Israel despite comments on Wednesday by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert that Israel had destroyed its infrastructure.

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=worldNews&storyID=2006-08-03T145324Z_01_L03374731_RTRUKOC_0_US-MIDEAST-ISRAEL-ROCKETS.xml

where's the 'security' in the killing of the 680 plus Lebanese civilians. It appears they had little or nothing to do with the attacks on Israel as they have continued unabated. Another two weeks of Israel's assault, as the US and the UN appear to be allowing, will certainly double that number with no demonstrated effect from the deaths in stopping Hizbollah's attacks. Their strategy is bankrupt, and appears to be nothing more than revenge on innocents who have little to do with Hizbollah outside of geography.

[bryant69]

1. That's not a very logical response

I mean I see what you are saying; but that would only work if Israel was done invading Lebanon (which they aren't). It's like taking cough drops, coughing and assuming the cough drops don't work; maybe they just haven't been absorbed into the system yet.

I'm not commenting on the wisdom or morality of Israel's actions; just saying that this particular argument doesn't make a lot of sense.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[bigtree]

3. what response? The killings haven't worked. Will more killings work?

Whatever they were aiming at has done little else but kill innocents. The ability of Hizbollah to launch rockets into Israel hasn't been diminished by these killings, no matter what Israel says they were aiming at. The strategy of bombing Lebanese towns and cities hasn't had any measurable effect on the ability of Hizbollah to launch rockets into Israel. Olmert said he wanted a victory before he would agree to a ceasefire. There doesn't appear to be any victory at hand, despite his continued airstrikes into Lebanon.

Where is the evidence that the strategy which has resulted in 680 plus Lebanese deaths is working to unseat Hizbollah and eliminate the threat to Israel. If anything, the wanton killings have increased any animosity there may have been toward Israel from Lebanese and increased the potential for reprisals from folks who are fed up with dying under the weight of Israel's missiles. The strategy is bankrupt. How much longer will the international community allow Israel to stack up more Lebanese dead before they admit the strategy has not worked?

How many more dead before they admit the airstrikes which killed hundreds of innocent Lebanese are antithetical to their stated cause?

[bryant69]

4. The Killings haven't worked yet

That doesn't mean that the plan to eliminate Hezbollah has failed, because presumably they aren't done killing.

Let's be clear - you oppose their plan anyway, so feel comfortable asking for immediate results. If you believed in the plan, than you'd be a bit more patient and let it run it's course, and assume the success would be apparent down the road a bit.

Bryant

[bigtree]

7. I refuse to be *patient* as innocents are slaughtered

in the name of someone else's 'security'

The airstrikes should be stopped immediately to preserve innocent Lebanese lives. Hizbollah should be stopped as well, but not by trampling on innocents. We can't expect much from murderous agressors like Hizbollah, mindless lobbing rockets into Israel, but we should expect more from leaders who profess to be so concerned with the preservation and protection of innocent lives.

[bryant69]

8. True enough.

[Minstrel Boy]

2. Israel's future rests in either mutual security

or making a graveyard of its neighbours. And by choosing the latter course it also digs its own grave.

[msmcghee]

12. Mutual security?

With regimes that have vowed to either kill you or push you into the sea? You need some more "Hezbollah Peace Pills".

[bigtree]

14. peace with Lebanon, not Hizbollah

Hizbollah needs to be disarmed. They aren't the Lebanese government. Israel's reprisals which have killed hundreds of Lebanese civilians, many children, do not seem to be affecting Hizbollah to the degree that the threat to Israel from those combatants has lessened at all.

Israel needs to form an alliance with the Lebanese government and join forces to neutralize the threat from Hizbollah, either politically or militarily if necessary. Lebanon isn't at war with Israel, Hizbollah combatants are. That's what makes the 'collateral' or deliberate killings of Lebanese civilians by Israeli forces so unjust.

A collaboration between Lebanon and Israel has more of a prospect of ensuring Israel's security and safety than the present strategy which is inflaming so much justifiable anger from those who had already determined to live in peace with them. I fear the strident assaults by Israel will create more resentment which will lead to more reprisals directed against them and their interests.

[msmcghee]

18. Israel has always supported that cooperation.

Even now Israel says they have no quarrel with the Lebanese people or their government.

You say Hezbollah needs to be disarmed. Yes, That's what Israel is doing. Israel would much rather that Lebanon would have done that - or asked for help from the UN. But Lebanon did not. They could have done it bloodlessly.

Now, you blame Israel for civilian deaths in Lebanon - when the blame lies squarely with Lebanon for not solving this problem before military intervention was required.

[bigtree]

24. I still don't understand how the Lebanese civilians have anything to do

with all of that.

They are caught in the middle and underneath Israel's airborne reprisals. I blame Israel for the way they have prosecuted their defense. There's no evidence that trampling on the Lebanese civilians will have any significant effect on the ability of Hizbollah to launch their rockets. Even if it did cause them to stop it would be despicable.

The Israelis have decided that the lives of the Lebanese civilians are less important than the lives they say they're defending with their airstrikes. Israeli authorities have decided that eliminating their stated target is more important than preserving the lives of unarmed, unthreatening Lebanese civilians. That's reprehensible conduct and should be condemned. If they were a signatory to the International War Crimes Tribunal they would be subject to charges under the War Crimes Act for their conduct in this campaign.

[msmcghee]

26. Israel estimates that they have eliminated . .

. . about 2/3 of the Hezbollah rocket capability so far. I don't know if they mean launchers, missiles, infrastructure, combatants - or some combination.

Israel has never purposely attacked civilians. They always go after combatants and weapons and enemy infrastructure. Civilians get hurt and killed when that happens because their enemies hide among the population and in the refugee camps - knowing that civilians will die if Israel tries to root them out.

I think Israel's approach is to avoid civilians if possible but don't take Israeli casualties or fail on the mission by being too cautious. I think that was our approach to defeating Germany and Japan in WWII. Even then we destroyed places like Dresden and Hiroshima and killed many thousands of civilians doing it.

There were pros and cons for the military value of those targets to the war effort and those arguments continue today. I'd say Israel is killing fewer civilians proportionally than we did and for clearer military reasons. Even if you disagree - it is still an arguable position. It is not our place to determine how Israel defends herself as long as she makes a good faith effort and does not target civilians purposely. No-one has credibly claimed otherwise.

They however, see no difference between killing Israeli civilians or IDF. They prefer Israeli civilians apparently because they are easier to find and they are less likely to have guns to defend themselves.

War is hell. That's why people who start them must be killed.

[bigtree]

5. From the Scene: Lebanon casualties

Aug. 3 - Lebanon's Prime Minister has said more than 900 people have died as a result of Israeli bombing and that a third of the casualties are children under the age of 12.

Now there's growing pressure for a UN resolution to deploy an international force on the border.

video : http://today.reuters.com/tv/videoStory.aspx?isSummitStory=false&storyId=098688ad3c8d38ddf90619226b3a1b6897f502a8&WTmodLoc=Home-R6-Video-4

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

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

[cali]

10. Actually,

unless the conflict widens, this will only go down in history as a minor footnote. Sad but true.

[KoKo]

13. Check out Sidney Blumenthal's article .....where he says it will widen

because the NeoCons are now back in charge and running the show to widen the war using their original "Plan for a Clean" break.

Snip from Blumenthal article at Salon:


Having failed in the Middle East, the administration is attempting to salvage its credibility by equating Israel's predicament with the U.S. quagmire in Iraq. Neoconservatives, for their part, see the latest risk to Israel's national security as a chance to scuttle U.S. negotiations with Iran, perhaps the last opportunity to realize the fantasies of "A Clean Break."

By using NSA intelligence to set an invisible tripwire, the Bush administration is laying the condition for regional conflagration with untold consequences -- from Pakistan to Afghanistan, from Iraq to Israel. Secretly devising a scheme that might thrust Israel into a ring of fire cannot be construed as a blunder. It is a deliberate, calculated and methodical plot.

[nadinbrzezinski]

19. Keep dreaming

the US has as much influence and control over Israel and the other way around as a gnatt. this crisis has provem how naked truly the American Empire is

[High Plains]

25. We could quit giving them billions of dollars in weaponry.

That might get their attention.

[ComerPerro]

9. firing rockets into Israel is no longer terrorism

its a counterattack. They're at war now.

[bigtree]

11. If it was decided by Lebanese govt. it might have some legitimacy

but the Lebanese military has mostly stood down in the face of the Israeli assaults. I think they will eventually be enlisted against the Hizbollah combatants.

The rockets being lobbed indiscriminately into Israel are from Hizbollah who are not representative of the Lebanese government, and have not been mandated by election or anything else to assault Israel on Lebanon's behalf.

At any rate, the way Hizbollah is assaulting Israel amounts to little but outright murder without any reasonable justification. They should be made to stand down. The killings on both sides should end immediately. Both campaigns are antithetical to their respective stated causes.

[ComerPerro]

15. Some people are here willing to forgive Israel and take their side

for things that they would never forgive their own country for.

[nadinbrzezinski]

17. Hisbollah has been at this game since 2000

not new, not now, did not start yesterday

They are a subnational organization NOT representing the nation of Lebanon

They are NOT the Frente Farabundo Marti... nor the Sandinistas...

They are terrorists pure and simple.

Have Israelis in this war made mistakes? Yes... were they on purpose? No... and I don't care how much you claim it is the case.

Has Hisbollah TARGETTED CIVILIANS and declared that the destruction of Isreal and the killing of every Jew in the area is their goal? Absolutely

Keep denying that reality... and as they say... in the propaganda face of the war Hisbollah 10, Israel, best case scenario 1

[ComerPerro]

20. Saddam has had WMD since 1992 and refused to disarm

[msmcghee]

27. Glad to see your name on that post Nadine. n/t

[bigtree]

21. I'm on the side of the innocents caught in the middle

of these weaponeers

[jonnyblitz]

22. that's amazing isn't it? nt

[ComerPerro]

23. stuns the shit outta me

[Skidmore]

16. There is no death over there, on either side, that is anything

but in vain. Endless cycles of killing solve nothing. No one's life is any better or safer on either side of the divide. I just don't get where the idea that an intentionally violent death is somehow "noble." It is senseless and gratuitous; a lazy man's way to solve a problem.

[malaise]

28. Only one sentence is appropriate

If you dig one ditch, you'd better dig two, one for your brother and one for you - Bob Marley