I have to agree

[Vlad D Impeller]

Re: I have to agree

Our news media are owned and operated by entertainment industries, therefore it should be no surprise to anyone with half a brain that the news delivery methods are based on a Disneyesque duplication format.

Well, if I understand your (and others') argument, when the news is good, the news is good. When the news is bad, it is all a fabrication and lies of the media, and the news is actually good.

Therefore, all the news in the region is good, no matter what.

Interesting. Lenin, Marx, Stalin, Hitler, would approve.
Heck, even Baghdad Bob would have concurred with that theory.

I could'nt care less if Lenin , Hitler or Baghdad Bob agreed with me or not, i believe that our news media in general engages in censorship to suit the political views of their respective corporate paymasters whilst sheltering under the banner of free speech and the public's right to know, the news is overly editorialised and presented in a format of sensationalism and entertainment.

 

[Boomyal]

Re: I have to agree

It is very sad.

The Lebanese sheltered, tolerated and even supported Hezbollah. Hezbollah is now trying to use the Lebanese as sheilds after unprovoked attacks on Israeli civilians. The Lebanese military seem impotent and/or unwilling to do anything about it. Iran and Syria need to be accountable for this

What evidence is there that any new cease fire would do any more good than any past cease fire? It would only give the Hezbollah TERRORISTS time to reorganize and rearm..

W and Condi have it right: bring it to a point that Hezbollah is made unable to mount new terrorist attacks. Then get an agreement with them, Syria and Iran. Agree to what? Damfino, but they better agree to something and stick to that agreement or WWIII is at hand.

You hit the nail on the head JB. It is as plain as day. When the rank and file do not recognize this you have to say that there must be another agenda that is fostered by the elite left.

The wonderment of it all is that they suck in the intelligent likes of PW and Rolmops, et al!

 

[Skinnywater]

Re: I have to agree

If there is anything that our incursion in Iraq, and more recently Israel's into Lebanon should teach us is there are definite limits to what military action can accomplish. Someday we are going to have to learn to use diplomacy, and whatever leverage we can muster, to achieve a more desirable outcome. Perfect solutions are a noble goal, but not likely to be achieved.

Fifty plus years of diplomacy, leverage and generous amounts of muster is vastly greater than "Someday".
Limited military actions results in limited military accomplishments should be the lesson.

while isreal has the right to defend itself their reaction has gone beyond self defense to war on civilians

Their enemy conducts it's military operations (offensively)in civilian nieghborhoods. This is a learned terrorist tactic. It's a good one because in part it has confused you who the aggressor is. You went from "self defense" to a proactive war on civilians almost automatically.

 

[Vlad D Impeller]

Re: I have to agree

Hezbollah members are primarily from the shia sect which is approx 40% of the Lebanese population, it is not possible for Lebanon to unhinge the vast majority of its citizens from the clutches of Hezbollah without providing the basic needs and necessities to its people, the sort of thinge that we take for granted such as water supplies, electricity, healthcare, education and jobs.

 

[technostingray]

Re: I have to agree

\The wonderment of it all is that they suck in the intelligent likes of PW and Rolmops, et al!

And I bet that PW and rolmops et al. wonder how the intelligent likes of dubya and cheney haven't come up with a better solution. 8)

 

[rodbolt]

Re: I have to agree

thechno
they did.
its called keep the defense industry ramped up and stay the course and let the next administration pick up the pieces.
however the VA funding is sucking rather badly.

 

[technostingray]

Re: I have to agree

See, sarcasm has its place. Some people just can't see the forest for the trees. 8)

 

[Plainsman]

Re: I have to agree

So today when Hezbollah sent over 200 rockets, again for how many days, that are not target specific, just fired and killed people, not a big news story. But if Israel kills civilians, oh they are so bad.
You lefty's that want to talk and have the UN (useless unless they want to rape) pass more and more and more resolutions that Hezbollah won't follow (well they will while they re-arm) are living in LALAALALALALALALALALALLA (as posted elsewhere) land.

It needs to be taken care of once and for all!!! Heck, the Israeli's drop leaflets before they bomb to get out. Why can't some of you see that? My God! Wake up!!!
But I guess Bill never perjured himself in their eyes. Can't make the blind see can we?
I'm sure Techno will have some irrelevant response as he always does....blahblahblah

 

[Skinnywater]

Re: I have to agree

that are not target specific

That's the thing, hezzbollah rockets are target specific.
If given the choice to fire a rocket at a military target they'll choose a civilian one instead.

Decades of reality, actual events and recent history bare truths to be self-evident. It seems it exposes those that choose to be in denial.
Decades of diplomacy, cease-fires, war, occupation and an eventual bona-fide shift towards peace by Israel to give up land to their enemys.

In all those decades I've really never heard of an Israeli or American strap on a bomb, find the most crowded bus, club or city sidewalk full of innocent civilians, men, women and CHILDREN..........and blow themselves up.

 

[QC]

Re: I have to agree

Skinnywater has this one dead right!!! IMHO, this is the ultimate question. Who is acting morally and who is evil. You can pretend all day long that this is a 5000 year old conflict, a fight over a homeland, a fight that is too complicated to define, one that has no simple answer and then you can come back to planet earth and realize this is simply about the difference between murder and defense. It is that simple, there is no other thing to figure out or understand. Good guys vs. bad guys. End of story.

 

[Plainsman]

Re: I have to agree

When I sat that they are not target specific, I mean that they are not guided. They can't pick out a building. I know that that want to kill civialians.

 

[technostingray]

Re: I have to agree

When I say that they are not target specific, I mean that they are not guided. They can't pick out a building. I know that they want to kill civialians.

You're in a war and you want to kill you enemy, gee what a concept. Will there be a war trial? Why do they think the can further their cause by killing civilians? If what you say is true their cause is doomed to failure and their action is not unlike the blitz krieg. In war it is not who is right that counts it is who is left. If that doesn't scare you nothing will. 8)

 

[POINTER94]

Re: I have to agree

Blitz Krieg is completely different than what these piles of dog dirt are doing. BK is a coordinated "lightening war" that engages targeted air strikes, and fast moving ground forces that moves at such speed that the target cannot react in kind. It attack military targets, infrastructure and industry. It also has the ultimate goal of occupation. They win with overwhelming force and speed. Firing missiles indiscrimately into civilian areas draws no parallels.

Terrorists are uncoordinated (by design), have civilian populations as targets, and don't seek to occupy as they don't have a standing army, they win by political manipulation. BK's greatest tool is coordination and hardware (planes, tanks, etc), terrorists best weapon is the media. They win by the cowardise of their target and the cowardise of the rest of the world. The problem here is the Isreali's are not cowards, and they understand that their future is directly dependant on their resolve.

When the enemy consists of all civilians of a given belief or race that is called genocide, not war. War is different than murder, and that is what many don't seem to understand. There is a moral component that many seem to have forgot.

 

[PW2]

Re: I have to agree

Like Hiroshima and Nagasaki, right?

 

[RubberFrog]

Re: I have to agree

Nuke Lebanon!

 

[LFK]

Re: I have to agree

Nuke the whole Middle East.

 

[POINTER94]

Re: I have to agree

History has shown that the use of nuclear weapons on Japan not only saved lives, but shortened the war, reduced destruction, saved civilian lives and perhaps prevented the future use of nuclear arms.

Nice try PW, but this was not a systematic attempt to eliminate a race of people or a nation. It was a military decision, and some might say a moral one.

In todays day and age, nuclear weapons are for cowards. May we never use them again.

 

[Skinnywater]

Re: I have to agree

Like Hiroshima and Nagasaki, right?

There ya go. I think you've got a grip on it now.
They sucker punched us in Pearl Harbor. Came close to whipping us in the Pacific. Mean while they practiced mass genocide throughout Asia and China.
Then without the media and the complete absence of those that called for..."diplomacy", we stopped them and a world war.
And by war, I mean war. We utterly destroyed our enemy, completely removed all their will to fight again.
THEN we built their country and introduced them to democracy.... after the war was won.

I know you slung all you could. Even to the point of having a few here looking at a map of the middle east for Nagasaki, Lebonon and that great holy city in Gaza, Hiroshima.
And you've called for diplomacy where it's been used to exaustion. And sided with those that are praised for targeting civilian (completely non-military) targets.

Rather than simply debating with you and Rodbolt, I'd sincerely love for you to bring some type of fact, truth or vaugue reasoning for your reluctance to accept the same.

 

[rodbolt]

Re: I have to agree

skinnywater I have given you so much information in the past 3 years its not funny, IG reports,congressional records. but anything that does not reflect your view of history is trash mouthed with some political reference.
I am most likly way more conservative than you. thats why I say quit supporting Israeal and a few other places with arms and cash and let them sink or swim. by the way, are you aware our isreali friends are currently under state dept sanctions for reverse engineering US arms and selling them to china and a few other places and for modifying/upgrading the predator drones that they resold to china to current specs?

look very very closely at the pics of the chinese fighter that downed one of our P-3 aircraft a few years back. tell me who made the air to air missles under the fighters wings and where they bought them. bat ya cannot, or will not.


not bad for our ally.
I dont condone hezbollah nor any other terrorist types, be it KKK, aryan nation,al queada the IRA the PLA. however the US created and covertly supported most of them in the name of "communism".
I try to look at history as an object not just what the paper prints.
most dont stop to think what we did to syria,lebanon,iran,iraq and a few other places, we wont even mention the two great traitors in the honduras and nicaragua.
but if you search carefully though the IG and congressional reports, do a bit of searching through more non political biased international reports it starts getting clear.
hillary blew ole rumsfeld a new one the other night, as as much as I dislike hillary my disdain for ole rummy is worse. worse now cause he lied and lkied again on the TV the other night.
maybe we can debate the great tactical and political prowess of Donald Rumsfeld ?
so yes I will be willing to debate anything you wish, however ya need to quit calling me,and some others leftist and some other derogatory remarks you have made in the past.
I have found when someone resorts to name calling and distractions it means they can no longer debate and must shift attention.

 

[Skinnywater]

Re: I have to agree

Rodbolt, you may or may not be as conservative as me. And in many instances we agree on more than not, even when our positions are not popular with either side.
I'm not sure what you mean about a differing view of history being trash-mouthed. I can re-read all I've said historically here and still won't understand where I've mis-spoke. Maybe you can help with an example.

However, this is the statement that initiated my debate with you.

while isreal has the right to defend itself their reaction has gone beyond self defense to war on civilians

While it might be impressive your knowledge about history, political relationships, deeds or misdeeds, the above statement wouldn't be an honest one. It wouldn't be an honest one if you were to substitute the name of any other country in the place of Israel all things being equal.
History does show that Israel and especially the people of Israel have always been on the defense. And history shows that if Israel is on the offense, it's because they are pro-actively defending themselves.
"Land for peace" is pro-active piece of recent history that should be a consideration given to Israel.

China, Hillary, Rummy and most of what you just posted is hardly relevant to your above quote or my debating points to it.