user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
I think the 'not targeting civilians' defense is another Technical Truth ... by willingly devastating known civilian areas, in the effort to reach their intended targets, the disregard for collateral damage amounts to basically the same.
^In other words, the Israelis think they can lie their way out of it.
If they were targeting civilians the death toll should be a hell of a lot higher than 1000 people.
The photo seems to indicate that Israel's just on a terror campaign of its own.
Irrelevant. It doesn't show or indicate what was located there.
^^^Yeah right Fiddle - it only indicates that a lot of random innocent civilian homes USED to be there.
Oh great I’m on ken’s side when it comes to Israel’s aggression. Someone shoot me now.
by seon on Wed Aug 09, 06 6:03pm
[+]
Lol! "Irrelevant!" So it is spoken, so shall it be! Oh man.
Now if it this was a picture of where a Hezbollah rocket had hit, Herzog and Fiddle would be climbing the walls "they killed civilians, they killed civiilans!!!! "
No wonder the world is heading to hell. Unbelievable. Just unbelievable. Most people with a brain would be horrified no matter WHICH side did it..but nope, the "moral majority" brigade of Herz and Fid and Jinn have ruled that Israel is pure and without fault, so guess thats their idea of being a moral and just (and liberal) person. Sorry, but when I write liberal about you know who, I just can't keep a straight face :) Yes, just like Joe Lieberman is a "liberal." Sure. Sure he is. Heck...sure you are! If you say it, it must make it true, right?
patch thats how it should be. I'm horrafied when innocent women and children are murdured by both sides.
by seon on Wed Aug 09, 06 7:46pm
[+]
"Oh great I’m on ken’s side when it comes to Israel’s aggression."
he doesn't a actually think what he says, you should know that by now.
Voted : The photo doesn't prove that Israel was intentionally targeting civillians
The fact is that Hezbollah operates in civillian areas- this even includes in hospitals and mosques. The Hezbollah probably does this intentionally to make the civillians as pretty much political shields.
The photo displays that civillian areas have been hit and that there were likely to have been a lot of civillian deaths (but we all already knew that). However, the photo does not prove that Hezbollah was not operating in the area. The only evidence you have presented is an argument of "Oh, but civillians areas were destroyed (we all already knew that) therefore Israel must have targeted civillians on purpose." This kind of argument of course is flawed, because once again it is jumping to the conclusion that damage to civillian areas was aimed at the civillians. Your argument is also blatantly notorious for the assumption that Hezbollah did not operate in the area. Your photo does not prove or disprove that Israel believed Hezbollah was operating in that area, therefore it does not prove or disprove whether civillians were intentionally targeted or whether it was collateral damage.
YOur photo does prove, however, that regardless of whether it was intentional targeting of civillians or collateral damage, either way it was disgusting.
"I think the 'not targeting civilians' defense is another Technical Truth ... by willingly devastating known civilian areas, in the effort to reach their intended targets, the disregard for collateral damage amounts to basically the same."
by Cathexis on Aug 09, 2006 11:29am
"^In other words, the Israelis think they can lie their way out of it."
by cranky
- Actually, that is not what Cathexis said. What Cathexis said is that whether or not it was intentional targeting of civillians or whether it was collateral damage is a technicality, which from his point of view is equally as immoral as each other. Cathexis did not say however, that this photo proves that Israel intentionally targeted civillians.
Socrates, hezbollah operates in hospitals and mosques as a charity organisation. They do charity work as well!
Only a very, very, very few nations call them a terrorist organisation. You can guess who.
patch22us- I am not a fan of Israel at all. So I don't think I have a bias in favour for them. Honestly, I have not seen any evidence that Israel intentionally targeted civillians in Lebanon. The photo does not prove or disprove whether the Israelis believed Hezbollah was operating in that area. Without evidence, it would seem that it were collateral damage. Collateral damage is a disgusting part of war, I don't like it at all, I think it is immoral, and I do not support it, which is why I am a pacifist.
If however, someone is not a pacifist but disapproves of collateral damage, perhaps they should look historically at the reality of war, reassess their stance, and perhaps become a pacifist?
Lovelynice- They are both a charity organisation and a terrorist organisation. It is not a case of one or the other. They have been infamous to let both sides of their character overlap, and have been accused of doing terrorist organisation inside their charity areas as well.
As for nations calling them a terrorist organisation? Whether they are being called that or not is irrelevant. Evidence reveals they are a terrorist organisation given their past actions.
In fact, MOST Islamist militant groups operate as both terrorists AND social-welfare organisations.
"Socrates, hezbollah operates in hospitals and mosques as a charity organisation. They do charity work as well!"
ah, so they are trying to make targets out of civilians.
how can they be terrorists without using fear tactics?
{Lovelynice- They are both a charity organisation and a terrorist organisation. It is not a case of one or the other. They have been infamous to let both sides of their character overlap, and have been accused of doing terrorist organisation inside their charity areas as well.
As for nations calling them a terrorist organisation? Whether they are being called that or not is irrelevant. Evidence reveals they are a terrorist organisation given their past actions.
by Socrates on Aug 09, 2006 9:55pm}
I don't agree. They're both a paramilitary group and a social welfare group. If you really think that they are a terrorist organisation, then why is it that they are only listed as a "terrorist" organisation by Israel, USA, Canada, Australia, Netherlands.
The EU does not consider Hezbollah, or any group within it, a terrorist organization.
It seems to be only another case of "They're against my side, therefore I'll call them terrorists".
Lovelynice- terrorist group or militant insurgent group. I am accepting of both labels.
neo sadly I'm more then aware of that.
by seon on Wed Aug 09, 06 11:36pm
[+]
{how can they be terrorists without using fear tactics?
by neothe1 on Aug 09, 2006 10:47pm}
If all it takes is the use of fear tactics, then the Israeli military is also a terrorist organisation.
Its so funny,how Israel always does a mistake.Mistake, mistake, mistake, sorry, mistake, mistake.
I thought the IDF was the 5th strongest/best military in the world.How can the 5th best military in the world always get civilians as victims?If they are so bad,that they just keep killing civilians,why on earth wage a war in the first place?If they cant actually fight well,what would you do,go fight the baby in the blanket????
It's funny. The neo-cons always accuse the press of fraud whenever they make a mistake in their coverage of Lebanon, but when the Israelis wantonly kill civilians, Israel is just making a mistake.
no, the isrealis aren't using fear tactics either. they're just killing each other. fear tactics are things like your colour-coded alerts, and basically everything on your news. see "bowling for columbine", that shows real terrorism.
My second ballot choice is in response to the ballot choice below my first one.
cranky- firstly, I am not a neo-con. Secondly, your assertion of a 'mistake' is not even proven either. Your photo does not prove or disprove whether or not Hezbollah was operating in that region. If Hezbollah was, and Israel was targeting them, then it was indeed collateral damage (which itself is disgusting), but is not targeting civillians as your ballot question inquires of.
You have not presented any evidence of Israel intentionally targeting civillians. All you have proven is that civillians have been affected, which has already been known.
I'm going to second what has already been said. Hezbolla is using civilian installations as staging grounds and hiding places for some time now. These terrorists are no joke, they know damn well what is going to get people like cranky upset, they know that by hiding out near civilians, a choice must be made: either Israel has to stop going after the terrorists, or Israel realizes what Hezbolla is doing and is forcing Lebanon to face the consequences of harboring an Iranian backed terrorist organization that wants to wipe Israel off the map, and would kill every jew on the planet if they could, but going full speed ahead and going after them regardless.
It's not pretty, but war seldom is. Israel isn't going to shy away from blowing these terrorists to hell.
Is it the right way to do things? That's a tough question, not for arm chair bleeding heart types sitting in the comfort of their own homes, they'll condemn Israel immediatly. I'm looking at all the facts and I'm readily admitting i'm not so sure about the whole thing.
so they should just go along with it? they should kill inocent people and JUSTIFY their enemies' cause? play into their strategy?
They do not justify their enemies cause if they kill their enemies in the process.
yes, they do. they make hezbollah right, and victims, in the minds of their "audience", for lack of a better word.
though obviously they ARE right in opposing isreal, but their methods negate that, they lose the privilege of being right by killing people, and even more by allowing (or helping) people to be killed just to gain public support. it makes them no better than the united states.
|
|
