Brave IDF caught on tape using human shield

[earth_as_one]

CB,

Israel can't claim to be defending itself while it illegally occupies land belonging to others. The people Israel ethnicaly cleansed from their land, have a UN recognized right to return home. While Israel violates international law and ignores UN resolutions, attacks on Israeli military targets are legal until Israel complies with UN resolutions and past agreements.

However, neither side can legally attack civilian targets.

Images which came out of Lebanon last summer speak for themselves. As a result far fewer people see Israel as an innocent victim.

Minor border skirmishes have always been common along the Israeli/Lebanese border. Bombing cities and airports is far less common. Technically Israel is still at war with Lebanon and Syria. Therefore military operations like the one Hezbollah carried out which captured Israeli soldiers did not violate international law. Hezbollah's attack may have been a violation of agreements between Israel and Lebanon, but before that attack Israel routinely violated Lebanese airspace, and sniped at Lebanese positions on the Lebanese side of the border which was also in violation of past agreements. But neither side targetted civilians until last summer.

In your statement above is a point of logic you seemed to have missed. If Hezbollah captured Israeli soldiers to barter, then that implies Israel was already holding Lebanese people. Under the terms of the last ceasefire, Israel and Lebanon were supposed to free all their POWs. But Israel held a few back for future negotiation in violation of that ceasefire agreement. Therefore Hezbollah has a legal right capture and hold Israeli soldiers, the same way Israel captures and holds Lebanese soldiers. Normally I don't reference blogs, but this one references UN documents.

Lebanese POWs - Israel's dirty little secret



Samir al-Qintar is a PoW languishing in an Israeli prison for the last 28 years, and - brace yourself - he was 16 years old when he was captured (i.e., kidnapped).

The following excerpt is from a letter dated 11 February 1999 from the Permanent Representative of Lebanon to the United Nations, addressed to the Secretary-General.

Trials [in Israel] are purely pro forma, and there is no difference between those tried, those who have served their sentences and those being held without trial. All of them are hostages.

By its decision of 13 November 1997, the Supreme Court of Israel acknowledged that the Lebanese detainees are hostages and are a bargaining chip.

That Israel has enshrined hostage-taking and torture in its laws is a flagrant violation of international law and sets a precedent that is the first of its kind in the world. It has never before happened in all of history that a court of justice has sanctioned the taking of hostages. Some detainees were not tried following their abduction, and they are languishing in prisons that the International Committee of the Red Cross is forbidden to enter and are not allowed to exchange letters with their families...

http://wakeupfromyourslumber.blogspot.com/2006/07/lebanese-pows-israels-dirty-little.html
​

​

Another point you seem to have missed is that Israel and Lebanon had an agreement not to hit civilian targets:

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 deliberately hit civilian targets in response to Hezbollah's purely military operation in violation of the above agreement. As a result, Hezbollah was no longer obligated to respect the same agreement.

Does anyone claim Lebanon or Syria illegally occupies Israeli territory?

Does anyone claim that any Israelis live under an illegal occupation and are subjected to conditions suffered by Palestinians?

So please spare me the Israel victim story.

 

[CDNBear]

CB,

Israel can't claim to be defending itself while it illegally occupies land belonging to others. The people Israel ethnicaly cleansed from their land, have a UN recognized right to return home. While Israel violates international law and ignores UN resolutions, attacks on Israeli military targets are legal until Israel complies with UN resolutions and past agreements.

Taking of prisoners purely for bartering, is illegal. No matter what the target you took them from. That has been openly admitted by the Hezbollah.

However, neither side can legally attack civilian targets.

Yet the Hezbollah fires rockets at purely civilian targets with or without provikation.

Images which came out of Lebanon last summer speak for themselves. As a result far fewer people see Israel as an innocent victim.

Of course, it's called the "propoganda war of atrition" being waged by the Hezbollah and people like you, that ignore and/or justify the actions of the Hezbollah and blanketly condemn Israel.

Minor border skirmishes have always been common along the Israeli/Lebanese border.

Attacking a military target is an act of war. Taking of prisoners for trade is against international law.

Bombing cities and airports is far less common. Technically Israel is still at war with Lebanon and Syria. Therefore military operations like the one Hezbollah carried out which captured Israeli soldiers did not violate international law.

Wrong, the Hezbollah does not have what is known as a "standing army", they do not enter battle uniformed and therefore are not legal capabale to enter into an act of war. Hence their kidnapping of Israeli Soldiers for barter, is illegal.

Attacking airports and infrastructure is common military tactics.

Hezbollah's attack may have been a violation of agreements between Israel and Lebanon, but before that attack Israel routinely violated Lebanese airspace, and sniped at Lebanese positions on the Lebanese side of the border which was also in violation of past agreements. But neither side targetted civilians until last summer.

So all those rochet attacks were for?

In your statement above is a point of logic you seemed to have missed. If Hezbollah captured Israeli soldiers to barter, then that implies Israel was already holding Lebanese people.

People? How about criminals? Plotting to attack civilians is a crime.

Under the terms of the last ceasefire, Israel and Lebanon were supposed to free all their POWs. But Israel held a few back for future negotiation in violation of that ceasefire agreement.

Those are people with convictions for crimes beyond the scope of POW. Obviously.

Therefore Hezbollah has a legal right capture and hold Israeli soldiers, the same way Israel captures and holds Lebanese soldiers.

As I have already explained, the Hezbollah is not a recognized "standing army", it wages war un-uniformed, it employees terrorist tactics and are a non nationed group. Therefore your claim is invalid.

Another point you seem to have missed is that Israel and Lebanon had an agreement not to hit civilian targets

So why didn't the Hezbollah control its own people and stop them from launching rockets into Israel. If they were serious about peace, that would be a smart move, do you not think?

Israel deliberately hit civilian targets in response to Hezbollah's purely military operation in violation of the above agreement. As a result, Hezbollah was no longer obligated to respect the same agreement.

They've never felt obligated and never will. Those civilian targets you keep claiming Israel targetted, were purely military tactical targets.

Does anyone claim Lebanon or Syria illegally occupies Israeli territory?

Nope, but why didn't the Hezbollah wage the same war against them, when the rolls were reversed?

Does anyone claim that any Israelis live under an illegal occupation and are subjected to conditions suffered by Palestinians?

They have in the recent past, as war after war was waged against them for having a nation created for them, long before they took steps to protect themselves, with buffer zones and claims of the spoils of war.

So please spare me the Israel victim story.

Sure, I know they're no angels. But could you spare us the "Hezbollah is great" BS. You're a nazi sympathizer, plain and simple. Your constant and contiued defence of and support of the Hezbollah is proof of that.

 

[earth_as_one]

You disagree? You think 2 wrongs make a right? You think Hizbollah would publish vids about them firing rockets at Israel from houses? I'm not sure what you are disagreeing about.

I don't think anything has looked goodd in the middle east for a long time. But I od have 1 solution, everyone should butt out and leave them to themselves. Let the Sunni and Shia have it out, let the Hizbollah and the Palestines take on Israel, etc.

My point is that when Israel escalated last summmer's conflict by attacking civilian targets, Hezbollah was no longer obligated to respect agreements with Israel not to attack civilian targets.

I suppose Hezbollah could have choosen not to attack Israeli civilian targets in response Israel's attacks on Lebanese civilians, but is that reasonable?

I would expect the Canadian government to target civilians of hostile nations if those nations targetted Canadian civilians. But I wouldn't want Canada to cross that line first, like Israel did.

If Hezbollah did not attack Israeli civilians, then what would be Israel's motivation to stop attacking Lebanese civilians?

 

[CDNBear]

My point is that when Israel escalated last summmer's conflict by attacking civilian targets, Hezbollah was no longer obligated to respect agreements with Israel not to attack civilian targets.

I suppose Hezbollah could have choosen not to attack Israeli civilian targets in response Israel's attacks on Lebanese civilians, but is that reasonable?

I would expect the Canadian government to target civilians of hostile nations if those nations targetted Canadian civilians. But I wouldn't want Canada to cross that line first, like Israel did.

If Hezbollah did not attack Israeli civilians, then what would be Israel's motivation to stop attacking Lebanese civilians?

Seeing as the Hezbollah is the cause of all the attacks on civilians...

1) By launching rocket attacks on Israel from civilian locations.
2) By kidnapping Israeli Soldiers in violation of international law.
3) By continuing to emass weapons in the region bordering Israel, in violation of resolutions.
4) By waging war as un-uniformed combantants.

Your point is not only invalid, it is erroneous at best.

 

[earth_as_one]

Seeing as the Hezbollah is the cause of all the attacks on civilians...

1) By launching rocket attacks on Israel from civilian locations.
2) By kidnapping Israeli Soldiers in violation of international law.
3) By continuing to emass weapons in the region bordering Israel, in violation of resolutions.
4) By waging war as un-uniformed combantants.

Your point is not only invalid, it is erroneous at best.

Hezbollah used their weapons to kill civilians just like Israel used their weapons to kill civilians. But Israel used their weapons to start slaughter civilians first. What kind of weapons they used make little difference to the dead.

Soldiers are not "kidnapped" by the enemy. Capturing enemy soldiers is legal in war.

You are going to defend Israel by referencing UN Resolutions and international law? That's rich.

From 1967 to 1988 the UN Security Council passed 88 resolutions directly against Israel and during that span, Israel was condemned 43 times. During this time, in the UN General Assembly, 429 resolutions against Israel were passed, and Israel was condemned 321 times.[3][4]
Resolutions condemning Israel were not made under Chapter VII of the UN Charter and are therefore considered to have no binding force under international law [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15].
The United States, a strong ally of Israel, has unilaterally used its veto power to prevent Chapter 7 resolutions from passing through the Security Council.[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_UN_resolutions_concerning_Israel

Obviously, Palestinians and the rest of Israel's neighbors cannot rely on the UN to protect them from Israel. The best they get are strongly worded condemnations which Israel ignores.

Nor can Israel's neighbors rely on Israel to keep their agreements.

Israel breaks ceasefire, threatens to assassinate Hezbollah leader


by Patrick Martin

Global Research, August 24, 2006


Israeli forces on Saturday carried out a flagrant violation of the ceasefire along the Lebanon-Israel border, as dozens of military commandos attacked the village of Boudai, near Baalbek in the Bekaa Valley of eastern Lebanon. The raid was the first full-scale breach in the ceasefire between Israeli and Hezbollah forces in south Lebanon which took effect on Monday, August 14.
Both Lebanese and United Nations officials denounced the raid. Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora issued a press statement in Beirut calling the attack a “flagrant violation” of the UN ceasefire resolution, while UN Secretary General Kofi Annan said he was “deeply concerned about a violation by the Israeli side of the cessation of hostilities.”...

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=MAR20060824&articleId=3058

Wow, some more harsh words followed by inaction.

For the rest of Israel's post ceasefire violations see this string:

Israeli's daily violations of the ceasefire agreement threaten to re-ignite this conflict.

Its only a matter of time until someone shoots down an Israeli warplane in Lebanon.

A good chance it won't be Hezbollah

http://forums.canadiancontent.net/i...r-ceasefire-violations-lebanese-airspace.html

In context your concerns about only Hezbollah's violations of UN resolutions are hypocritical.

What does international law say about state sanctioned torture, abductions of democratically elected leaders, indefinite incarcerations, assassinations and summary executions?

You do have a point about Hezbollah not wearing uniforms. I suggest you take it up at the UN. Maybe they will strongly condemn Hezbollah. Hopefully, while they are at it, they will chide Israel's "kidnapping" of democratically elected politicians and other civilians, torture, indefinite incarceration, assassinations and summary executions.

As far as civilians are concerned, Israel will even use attack helicopters to take out old men in wheel chairs as they leave their local mosque, killing them and everyone around them. That attack is detailed here:

1). F-16s jets fly overhead to hide noise of approaching helicopters.
2).Yassin kept to a known routine, every morning to the same mosque in the Sabra district, 100m from his home.
3).Pilot uses camera to guide missile.
4).Helicoptor gunships rise over buildings, lock on targets and fire at target.( Jordan Times, 3/23/04).

Palestinians hold the remains of the wheelchair used by Hamas spiritual leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin after he was killed in Gaza City March 22, 2004.


http://www.aljazeerah.info/Special Reports/Shaikh Ahmed Yassin's Assassination.htm

We all know how peaceful its gotten since then.


Back on Topic:

By Tom Regan | csmonitor.com
The Israeli human rights group B'Tselem has accused the Israeli army of using two Palestinian minors as human shields during their operations against militants in the town of Nablus in late February. The group reports on its website that an 11-year-old girl and a 15-year-old boy, as well as a 24-year-old man were used by the troops in "a flagrant breach of international humanitarian law and [an act that is] is explicitly and clearly prohibited by Israeli military orders.


In its letter to the Judge Advocate General, B'Tselem pointed out that this was the fourth time since June 2006 (when "Operation Summer Rains," in Gaza , took place), that the organization had documented Israeli soldiers' use of Palestinian civilians as human shields. As far as B'Tselem knows, in only one of these cases did the JAG order a Military Police investigation. That investigation has not yet been completed. In light of these cases, B'Tselem expressed its concern that the military order prohibiting this practice is not property communicated to soldiers, and that the delay in investigating these incidents conveys a message of lenience in the military's treatment of soldiers who engage in such practices.

The Associated Press reports Friday that the Israeli army has already announced a "thorough investigation" into the allegations.

Reuters reports that the 11-year-old girl in question, Jihan Daadush, said Israeli soldiers were questioning her family about "gunmen who had fired at the troops." She said they "threatened to arrest her" unless she led them to a nearby house...

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0309/p99s01-duts.html

Brave IDF soldiers caught on video hiding behind an 11 year old girl. Maybe the IDF should just make it official and install baby seats on their weapons.

 

[CDNBear]

Yes we know earth, the Hezbollah good, the IDF bad...

Blah blah blah!!!

All terrorists must be

by your measure, eh nazi sympathizer.

 

[earth_as_one]

I answered your questions, point by point. How about answering mine:

Should there be an age limit on human shields. For example is 11 old enough to be a human shield?

Should the IDF install baby seats on their weapons for the safety of baby human shields?

What is the measured response to threat threat poised by an old man in a wheelchair?

 

[Logic 7]

That figures. You are the type that would think 2 wrongs make a right.

I will always be with the resistance side, not the agressor, sorry.

And the Hizbollah don't give a crap where their rockets land either as long as they land in Israel.

You are blind then.

Hezbollah targeted more soldiers than civilians, their records shows it, this is something israel will never be able to say, cause their records shows way otherwise.


From Israel point of view, they attack bllindly, and then pretend killing hezbollah anywhere, and they are the one who pretend they are hiding themselves behind houses, could it be they are defending lebanese from israel's agression, according to immoral logic, you guys have, they should get out their way, and let the civilians dies.


VIVA HEZBOLLAH!!

 

[Logic 7]

Yes we know earth, the Hezbollah good, the IDF bad...

Blah blah blah!!!

All terrorists must be

by your measure, eh nazi sympathizer.

Hezbollah, are just like your friend who hijacked "Mercier Bridge" during OKA crisis in QC, they are a resistance group, period, Get real for once.

 

[CDNBear]

Hezbollah, are just like your friend who hijacked "Mercier Bridge" during OKA crisis in QC, they are a resistance group, period, Get real for once.

 

[CDNBear]

So what do you think bear, should the IDF install baby seats on their weapons for the safety of baby human shields?

I will always be with the resistance side, not the agressor, sorry.





Hezbollah targeted more soldiers than civilians, their records shows it, this is something israel will never be able to say, cause their records shows way otherwise.


From Israel point of view, they attack bllindly, and then pretend killing hezbollah anywhere, and they are the one who pretend they are hiding themselves behind houses, could it be they are defending lebanese from israel's agression, according to immoral logic, you guys have, they should get out their way, and let the civilians dies.


VIVA HEZBOLLAH!!

 

[Logic 7]

Truth hurt sometimes,admitting it, will help the pain to sore.

 

[CDNBear]

Truth hurt sometimes,admitting it, will help the pain to sore.

 

[earth_as_one]

How about answering a few questions like I did.

I answered your questions, point by point. How about answering mine:

Should there be an age limit on human shields. For example is 11 old enough to be a human shield?

Should the IDF install baby seats on their weapons for the safety of baby human shields?

What is the measured response to threat threat poised by an old man in a wheelchair?

 

[CDNBear]

How about answering a few questions like I did.

Do you remember the time I asked you the very same thing, only to have you act like an ass?

Those questions are borderline ignorant, not that much of a stretch for a nazi supporter, I guess.

What was the man in the wheel chair preaching again?

Post an intelligent question, I might give you some respect.

 

[earth_as_one]

Seeing as the Hezbollah is the cause of all the attacks on civilians...

1) By launching rocket attacks on Israel from civilian locations.
2) By kidnapping Israeli Soldiers in violation of international law.
3) By continuing to emass weapons in the region bordering Israel, in violation of resolutions.
4) By waging war as un-uniformed combantants.

Your point is not only invalid, it is erroneous at best.

Hezbollah used their weapons to kill civilians just like Israel used their weapons to kill civilians. But Israel used their weapons to start slaughter civilians first. What kind of weapons they used make little difference to the dead.

Soldiers are not "kidnapped" by the enemy. Capturing enemy soldiers is legal in war.

You are going to defend Israel by referencing UN Resolutions and international law? That's rich.

From 1967 to 1988 the UN Security Council passed 88 resolutions directly against Israel and during that span, Israel was condemned 43 times. During this time, in the UN General Assembly, 429 resolutions against Israel were passed, and Israel was condemned 321 times.[3][4]
Resolutions condemning Israel were not made under Chapter VII of the UN Charter and are therefore considered to have no binding force under international law [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15].
The United States, a strong ally of Israel, has unilaterally used its veto power to prevent Chapter 7 resolutions from passing through the Security Council.[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_UN_resolutions_concerning_Israel

Obviously, Palestinians and the rest of Israel's neighbors cannot rely on the UN to protect them from Israel. The best they get are strongly worded condemnations which Israel ignores.

Nor can Israel's neighbors rely on Israel to keep their agreements.

Israel breaks ceasefire, threatens to assassinate Hezbollah leader


by Patrick Martin

Global Research, August 24, 2006


Israeli forces on Saturday carried out a flagrant violation of the ceasefire along the Lebanon-Israel border, as dozens of military commandos attacked the village of Boudai, near Baalbek in the Bekaa Valley of eastern Lebanon. The raid was the first full-scale breach in the ceasefire between Israeli and Hezbollah forces in south Lebanon which took effect on Monday, August 14.
Both Lebanese and United Nations officials denounced the raid. Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora issued a press statement in Beirut calling the attack a “flagrant violation” of the UN ceasefire resolution, while UN Secretary General Kofi Annan said he was “deeply concerned about a violation by the Israeli side of the cessation of hostilities.”...

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=MAR20060824&articleId=3058

Wow, some more harsh words followed by inaction.

For the rest of Israel's post ceasefire violations see this string:

Israeli's daily violations of the ceasefire agreement threaten to re-ignite this conflict.

Its only a matter of time until someone shoots down an Israeli warplane in Lebanon.

A good chance it won't be Hezbollah

http://forums.canadiancontent.net/i...r-ceasefire-violations-lebanese-airspace.html

In context your concerns about only Hezbollah's violations of UN resolutions are hypocritical.

What does international law say about state sanctioned torture, abductions of democratically elected leaders, indefinite incarcerations, assassinations and summary executions?

You do have a point about Hezbollah not wearing uniforms. I suggest you take it up at the UN. Maybe they will strongly condemn Hezbollah. Hopefully, while they are at it, they will chide Israel's "kidnapping" of democratically elected politicians and other civilians, torture, indefinite incarceration, assassinations and summary executions.

As far as civilians are concerned, Israel will even use attack helicopters to take out old men in wheel chairs as they leave their local mosque, killing them and everyone around them. That attack is detailed here:

1). F-16s jets fly overhead to hide noise of approaching helicopters.
2).Yassin kept to a known routine, every morning to the same mosque in the Sabra district, 100m from his home.
3).Pilot uses camera to guide missile.
4).Helicoptor gunships rise over buildings, lock on targets and fire at target.( Jordan Times, 3/23/04).

Palestinians hold the remains of the wheelchair used by Hamas spiritual leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin after he was killed in Gaza City March 22, 2004.


http://www.aljazeerah.info/Special Reports/Shaikh Ahmed Yassin's Assassination.htm

We all know how peaceful its gotten since then.


Back on Topic:

By Tom Regan | csmonitor.com
The Israeli human rights group B'Tselem has accused the Israeli army of using two Palestinian minors as human shields during their operations against militants in the town of Nablus in late February. The group reports on its website that an 11-year-old girl and a 15-year-old boy, as well as a 24-year-old man were used by the troops in "a flagrant breach of international humanitarian law and [an act that is] is explicitly and clearly prohibited by Israeli military orders.


In its letter to the Judge Advocate General, B'Tselem pointed out that this was the fourth time since June 2006 (when "Operation Summer Rains," in Gaza , took place), that the organization had documented Israeli soldiers' use of Palestinian civilians as human shields. As far as B'Tselem knows, in only one of these cases did the JAG order a Military Police investigation. That investigation has not yet been completed. In light of these cases, B'Tselem expressed its concern that the military order prohibiting this practice is not property communicated to soldiers, and that the delay in investigating these incidents conveys a message of lenience in the military's treatment of soldiers who engage in such practices.

The Associated Press reports Friday that the Israeli army has already announced a "thorough investigation" into the allegations.

Reuters reports that the 11-year-old girl in question, Jihan Daadush, said Israeli soldiers were questioning her family about "gunmen who had fired at the troops." She said they "threatened to arrest her" unless she led them to a nearby house...

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0309/p99s01-duts.html

Brave IDF soldiers caught on video hiding behind an 11 year old girl. Maybe the IDF should just make it official and install baby seats on their weapons.

 

[earth_as_one]

How about answering a few questions like I did.

I answered your questions, point by point. How about answering mine:

Should there be an age limit on human shields. For example is 11 old enough to be a human shield?

Should the IDF install baby seats on their weapons for the safety of baby human shields?

What is the measured response to threat threat poised by an old man in a wheelchair?

No I'm serious.

The IDF clearly doesn't respect its own laws let alone international laws, so maybe we should just accept their behavior. So I seriously think they should install baby seats on IDF weaponry for the comfort and safety of their baby human shields. We wouldn't want a toddler falling off an IDF tank because they weren't properly secured. Lets face it babies would be easier to suspend from the barrels of machine guns than adults. But then again adults are easier to hide behind. It must be a toough choice when IDF soldiers are choosing their human shields.

But if the IDF is going to insist on hiding behind children, they should have to install baby seats.

Also I don't think its very sporting to use attack helicopters armed with laser guided rockets to kill old men in wheel chairs. I mean they can't even take the stairs to get away. They have to go down the ramp. That's definitely unfair. When the IDF attacks old men in wheelchairs, their soldiers should be restricted to wheelchairs and only be allowed to use wheelchair mounted weaponry.

 

[CDNBear]

How about answering a few questions like I did.



No I'm serious.

The IDF clearly doesn't respect its own laws let alone international laws, so maybe we should just accept their behavior. So I seriously think they should install baby seats on IDF weaponry for the comfort and safety of their baby human shields. We wouldn't want a toddler falling off an IDF tank because they weren't properly secured. Lets face it babies would be easier to suspend from the barrels of machine guns than adults. But then again adults are easier to hide behind. It must be a toough choice when IDF soldiers are choosing their human shields.

But if the IDF is going to insist on hiding behind children, they should have to install baby seats.

Also I don't think its very sporting to use attack helicopters armed with laser guided rockets to kill old men in wheel chairs. I mean they can't even take the stairs to get away. They have to go down the ramp. That's definitely unfair. When the IDF attacks old men in wheelchairs, their soldiers should be restricted to wheelchairs and only be allowed to use wheelchair mounted weaponry.

Grow up.

 

[Logic 7]

Also I don't think its very sporting to use attack helicopters armed with laser guided rockets to kill old men in wheel chairs.

That is exactly how they work.

In 2005, Martinique, 4 israelis(mossad) beat one person( a black guy) and took him by the back( by surprise), this is how they work,THE CHICKEN WAY.

 

[L Gilbert]

My point is that when Israel escalated last summmer's conflict by attacking civilian targets, Hezbollah was no longer obligated to respect agreements with Israel not to attack civilian targets.

I suppose Hezbollah could have choosen not to attack Israeli civilian targets in response Israel's attacks on Lebanese civilians, but is that reasonable?

I would expect the Canadian government to target civilians of hostile nations if those nations targetted Canadian civilians. But I wouldn't want Canada to cross that line first, like Israel did.

If Hezbollah did not attack Israeli civilians, then what would be Israel's motivation to stop attacking Lebanese civilians?

Far as I know after the Hizbollah caused the IDF to leave south Lebanon somewhere around 2000, they've been constantly but not regularly launching rocket attacks on Israel. Why? Israel withdrew. The Hizbollah must be aware that those rockets are hardly accurate. Is it like "We know the rockets aren't accurate, but we fired rockets at the IDF. It's an accident they went off course and landed in a market place"? Seems to me to be the same idea as if the US dropped a 3rd nuke on Japan after Japan surrendered.