Amnesty Finds Hizbullah Guilty of War Crimes.

[MikeyDB]

Nice dodge....

When the American pit-bull is at the gate, when despite world-wide protest from people in democratic nations with democratic governments the inevitability of this juggernaut descending on your people is apparent, and the only response available to you is asymetrical, the use of readily available materials applied to the task of delivering the strongest blow you can to the machine that you can't defeat....

You're begining to piss me off Jim, I think I've tried to remain relatively civil and you and a few others here seem to live for the moment when you can dollop your disdain and spread what passes for ascerbic wit over anyone attempting to discuss anything with you from a point of view with which you happen to disagree....

No response needed asshole I'm through attempting to communicate with someone who lives to hear his own voice.

 

[jimmoyer]

If you can get hold of a movie made at the request of Robert Strange McNamara titled "The Fog of War" you might consider how this hawk regards the fire-bombing and incineration of several hundred thousand Japanese. He freely admits that if Japan had won the war that both he and Curtis LeMay along with the president would and should stand trial for crimes against humanity. He's an advocate now (after the fact of course) for proportionality of response.
-------------------------------------------------------------MikeyDB---------------------------------------------

Robert McNamara was part of two nicknamed groups: The Best and the Brightest, AND, the Whiz Kids.

I did not know of his involvement in Japan, but certainly knew of it in Vietnam.

And Curtis LeMay I most associated with the Cuban Missle Crisis and how John and Robt Kennedy
kept him on a leash.

As for DIS-proportional response in WWII (and many feel such a response was justified) , it does a great dis-service to the truth when looking back in history out of the context of THEN under the illusion of the context of NOW.

Also proportional responses allows the perpertrator to have some guarranteed sheild, some
guarranteed expectation of a response that is limited and predictable.

 

[earth_as_one]

Another difference is the scale. Israel's war crime killed 1187 civilians. Hezbollah's war crime in response to Israel's war crime killed 44 civilians.
----------------------------------------------------earth_as_one---------------------------------------------------------

LOL !!

As if war should always be equal ?

If a midget kicks a giant in the shins, should the response be equal ???

Where's Shangra La ?

You misunderstood my point. It was that Hezbollah killed mostly IDF soldiers and only a few civilians. The IDF killed mostly civilians and only a few Hezbollah militants. Its not so much how many civilians that were killed but the ratio of soldiers to civilians which shows that Israel was deliberately killing Lebanese civilians.

If midget kicks a giant in the shins, of course the giant is justified hitting the midget back. But the giand cannot justify killing the midget's family, his neighbors and everyone from his village, just because he can't hit the midget back. If the giant does that, then the midget is justified killing as many members of the giants family, neighbors and everyone from the giant's village in response.

This was an initially a military conflict and Israel committed a war crime when it deliberately expanded the conflict to include Lebanese civilians.

 

[jimmoyer]

Good point about the Giant killing the whole family.

Perhaps the midget should not shoulder such a risk that endangers his family
if he can't predict what kind of a-hole he intends to bother ???

Proportional response SEEMS reasonable, except that no perpertrator should count
on such a response.

Ensuring predictability also ensures risk taking on the part of a perpertrator.

Do ya feel lucky ??

 

[earth_as_one]

Israel and Hezbollah have been playing this deadly game along the Israeli/Lebanon border for years and until recently both sides observed the terms of the "April Understanding".

Israeli-Lebanese Ceasefire Understanding

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


The Israeli-Lebanese Ceasefire Understanding (also known as The Grapes of Wrath Understandings and the April Understanding) was an informal written agreement between Israel and Hezbollah, reached through the diplomatic efforts of the US, which ended the 1996 military conflict between the two sides. The agreement was announced at 1800 hours, April 26, 1996.

Under the terms of the agreement, both sides agreed to end cross-border attacks on civilian targets, as well refrain from using civilian villages to launch attacks...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli-Lebanese_Ceasefire_Understanding

Israel broke that agreement when it deliberately targeted innocent Lebanese civilians:

...Human Rights Watch researchers found numerous cases in which the IDF launched artillery and air attacks with limited or dubious military objectives but excessive civilian cost. In many cases, Israeli forces struck an area with no apparent military target. In some instances, Israeli forces appear to have deliberately targeted civilians.

In one case, an Israeli air strike on July 13 destroyed the home of a cleric known to have sympathy for Hezbollah but who was not known to have taken any active part in the hostilities. Even if the IDF considered him a legitimate target (and Human Rights Watch has no evidence that he was), the strike killed him, his wife, their 10 children and the family’s Sri Lankan maid.

On July 16, an Israeli aircraft fired on a civilian home in the village of Aitaroun, killing 11 members of the al-Akhrass family, among them seven Canadian-Lebanese dual nationals who were vacationing in the village when the war began. Human Rights Watch independently interviewed three villagers who vigorously denied that the family had any connection to Hezbollah. Among the victims were children aged one, three, five and seven.

The Israeli government has blamed Hezbollah for the high civilian casualty toll in Lebanon, insisting that Hezbollah fighters have hidden themselves and their weapons among the civilian population. However, in none of the cases of civilian deaths documented in the report is there evidence to suggest that Hezbollah was operating in or around the area during or prior to the attack.

“Hezbollah fighters must not hide behind civilians – that’s an absolute – but the image that Israel has promoted of such shielding as the cause of so high a civilian death toll is wrong,” Roth said. “In the many cases of civilian deaths examined by Human Rights Watch, the location of Hezbollah troops and arms had nothing to do with the deaths because there was no Hezbollah around.”...

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/08/02/lebano13902.htm

Hezbollah has long had the capability to hit Israeli civilian targets, but they kept their word as per the terms of the April Understanding. After watching Israel violate that agreement for 48 hours, obviously Hezbollah was no longer obligated to respect the agreement either:

...although Hezbollah had said its policy was not to target civilians, its leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah said the policy was changed in reprisal for Israeli attacks on Lebanese civilian areas.

It quoted Sheikh Nasrallah as saying: "As long as the enemy undertakes its aggression without limits or red lines, we will also respond without limits or red lines."...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5343188.stm

So its not about predictability but about respecting an agreement which had until now kept innocent civilians out of this war. Now that this line has been crossed, I expect during the next battle, Hezbollah will be ready to give as good as they get.

You know what they say:

What goes around comes around.