In lebanon they don't see hezbollah as terrorists. They are more like freedom fighters to them. And how hard do you think it is to capture 2 soldiers?Originally Posted by Honoko
I myself don't think that terrorists have anything to do with this.
Could someone plz give me the definition of a terrorist?
The formal definition of terrorist is 'One who employs terrorism as a political tool' and terrorism is defined as 'the unlawful use or threat of violence esp. against the state or the public as a politically motivated means of attack or coercion'.
Essentially people who try to accomplish their political goals by attacking another countries assets in the hope of frightening them into agreement, usually the term is reserved for attacking civillian citizens of a country to get leverage over their government. I don't know what these Hezbollah have done in the past but I know that kidnapping soldiers is more an act of war than terrorism. I've read that they have attacked civillians intentionally though, and that is generally considered terrorism by the West. (Israel also bombed a TV station, which they probably justify by saying it was run by Hezbollah and hence terrorists, but that seems a little extreme to me)
Hezbollah is part of the Lebanese governement, apparently a large part with enough seats for veto power, but also has a military aspect which acts out it's will. I've read that their goal is the removal of Israel as a state, but I've also read that their goal is simply the removal of Israel from Lebanese territory so I don't know which to believe. I do know that the group is considered a terrorist organization by Israel and the United States and some other countries. This hinders their access to diplomatic solutions to their problems, if they were to seek them.
the problem with defining terrorism is this: you do not need to be a terrorist organization to use terrorism! The classic case in point is Germany and Japan during WWII, but also see Indonesia 1965-69. Sri Lanka is also an excellent example of the blurring of "terrorism".
Terrorism, as we see it portrayed in the news, is quite often insurgency/rebellion poorly defined. With Israel and the surrounding region, where multiple parties are all claiming a legitimate right to the land and authority, it is almost worthless to say that any one group has "the right" to monopolize violence in any given territory.
"unlawful violence" is another ill-defined term. Al-Qaeda, the US Revolutionaries, and Nazi resistance movements all used violence "illegaly", since the law was written by the government they were fighting against.
As if it's not enough, here's a second example.
A) An Iraqi insurgent shooting at a group of armed US soldiers.
B) An Iraqi terrorist shooting at unarmed US soldiers.
C) An Iraqi terrorist bombing a US medical facility.
Technically, B and C are defined as illegal by international law if the terrorist knows his targets are undefended. If a person is unarmed, they must be captured. Many US soldiers have been court martialed for violating this.
And what if the unarmed soldiers were walking to a cache to get in a tank that they would then use to attack a target, say the one that Iraqi is based at?
Doesn't that seem like watching and waiting while your enemy reloads, right in front of your eyes, with the intention of killing you when he finishes reloading? Consider too the hospital. Sleeping can be thought of as "reloading" the human body in a way, preparing it to attack that person the next day.
Now consider: D) US troops bombing a weapons producing factory.
Who do you think works in these factories? Armed men? Hah, doubtful. In this case killing defenseless civilians is justified because they are in the process of mounting an attack against the soldiers, hence the soldiers are simply defending themselves.
The problem is then this: How is bombing a hospital different from bombing the factory?
Humans are different from animals. We must die for a reason. Now is the time for us to regulate ourselves and reclaim our dignity. The one who holds endless potential and displays his strength and kindness to the world. Only mankind has God, a power that allows us to go above and beyond what we are now, a God that we call "possibility".
If you read my post correctly, I asked, "they could have not captured the soldiers" implying that whatever their reason for attacking Israel at that moment did not have to culminate with a capture, did it? I never questioned the ease of how one goes about doing it =P
And I never knew about Hezbollah being considered "freedom fighters" in Lebanon. My bad. No need to get so indignant, especially when you're not even reading my posts correctly. I even admitted that the statement wasn't intelligent.
As for the term "terrorism"-- I think it's an overused word these days. I get nauseated whenever I hear that word come out of our brilliant president's mouth. But in any case, any one who goes around trying to convince people to believe in one's ideology by the use of violence is one of the most selfish people out there and qualifies him/herself as a grade A asshole. Probably not a good definition of a terrorist but I think it's broad enough to apply to almost anyone who supports suicide bombers.
Israel Preparing for Ground War?
So far there's 330 Lebonese dead, compared to approx 31 Israelis who've died since this conflict started. Both sides appear to be stubborn and a bunch of civilians are suffering as a result. It appears that besides the UN, the Vatican is the only "state" that is publicly denouncing these attacks. I, for one, am disappointed with the US in their usual slow reactions to anything. Apparently they're just now planning to send Condi Rice over, nine friggin' days after the violence have started.
No, they had already planned to send her over. She has delayed her trip on purpose so that Israel will have more time to pound Lebanon. This was made public days ago.
^ Ah, I misread a paragraph in the article. It's still a shitty thing to do. "Gotta wait til the death toll's over 300 before we make a move." Repetitive disappointment for one's country can be frustrating.
Since it looks like Israel is calling up their reserves, giving them potentially 5000+ more war personnel, I would say that several ground strikes into Lebanon will occur before we know it. The one thing holding Israel back is the fear that Hezbollah will offer surprisingly solid resistance, a potential humiliation for Zion. Remember, Hezbollah does not need to win a ground war for them to 'win' the conflict in the eyes of many. Offerring a solid resistance against the more technologically advanced Israel would make Hezbollah heroes in many nations...
But I think Israel will only go with military strikes, maybe brief captures of Lebanese territory. I don't think they have what it takes to take over that entire country. They've been fighting since the moment the nation of Israel was founded and adding a hostile territory to their own would be a bad move. Look for them to quickly withdraw if they do advance ground troops.
Oh, and the UN has proposed a token initiative for both sides to call a ceasefire. But two of the Security Council (can you guess who? Come on, just take a guess) are opposed to the ceasefire. That's right, Bush and Tony Lapdog Blair don't want to call for a ceasefire until "Hezbollah is disarmed" and "Lebanese political control is extended into the south of the country" .... To me this seems like they're just saying 'Let Israel win and whichever new faction picks up the pieces in Lebanon we'll hope is better". Hezbollah will never give up its arms, and many Lebanese see them as the real representatives of the people (obviously not all, maybe not even most of them though, as is the case in America now...) The worst part of this is that with the US and UK holding the Security Council back from making any real decision on the matter the UN is not going to have a role in diplomacy, and possibly weaken humanitarian aid efforts, which is the real tragedy.
An excellent editorial on the US's role in the Middle East from the recent Time magazine
Humans are different from animals. We must die for a reason. Now is the time for us to regulate ourselves and reclaim our dignity. The one who holds endless potential and displays his strength and kindness to the world. Only mankind has God, a power that allows us to go above and beyond what we are now, a God that we call "possibility".
Well the president of the spanish government said that israels answer to Hezbollahs attack was disproportioned. That they where attacking civilian objetives. After this the israel embassador, the opposition and some jew agrupation called the president anti-semite and said that the diplomatic relationships where very severed. So its just normal that people dont say anything, this people fires up easily.
About US getting involved, it would be good if only they would vote yes to the UN resolutions and talk with israel. At least to make them see that selfdefense is one thing and state terrorism another. But I dont think that they are going to say anything to them even less get involved with some pacification forces after all the mess they have caused in that part of the world.
And this is a question correct me if im wrong but isnt the greates part of hezbollah under irani control-subvention? So why is everybody pointing libanon and dont say a shit about iran?
This all started because Israel didnt want to accept the Palestinian government and now the war is back to Lebanon. I bet after the war stops, Israel would expand his country more.
Anybody got some friends in Lebanon now? I got a few friends there and they are still not back in Canada. Hopefully, they will get here alive.
Also, found an interesting site, got some shocking pictures....
http://www.fromisraeltolebanon.info/
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
