Hello from Isarel! - Page 7 - U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum

Maxture · #91 (**permalink**) 07-24-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by FreeThinker

you're quoting right wing sources and saying hrw is pro-hezbollah.. man.. where have you lived your life? in a cave somewhere in the boonies? jeez.. you all don't know what and who HRW is?

Well spoken. The question however is if our friend from Israel understands what we mean. I will give jpsartre an example:

You resort to evidently biased sources, including war Greuel propaganda. Please study the following sources:

"US Army Uses Iraqi Children As Human Shields Again"

http://raedinthemiddle.blogspot.com/...-as-human.html

"now the [US] military is using Iraqis as human shields on the streets and highways in an effort to protect themselves from attacks by the resistance."

http://blog.newstandardnews.net/iraq...es/000356.html

Well, those evidently are other pieces of biased propaganda. You would be justified to dismiss that as evidence of a US policy of using Iraqi children as human shields. Maybe now you can understand why resorting to such invalid sources only is harmful to your cause?

Nevertheless, since you are so interested in the question on human shields, hopefully in principle, here are some indeed reliable sources on the use of human shields in a conflict. You probably were not aware of the fact that if anyone is using human shields in the present conflict, it is the Israeli side:

Human Rights Watch:

"In the four cases researched in detail by Human Rights Watch, eyewitnesses described a night of panic and terror, including death threats, house demolitions, and wide-scale arrests. In each of these cases, the IDF routinely coerced civilians to perform life-endangering acts that assisted IDF military operations. [. . .] This report finds that the IDF is systematically coercing Palestinian civilians to assist military operations. This practice violates a fundamental principle of IHL: that of civilian immunity. It violates Israel's obligation to protect and respect civilian persons under Article 27 of the Fourth Geneva Convention,3 and recklessly exposes civilians to danger. The threats and coercion used by the IDF to compel civilians to assist them are explicitly prohibited under Article 31 of the Convention."

http://www.hrw.org/reports/2002/israel2/israel0402.htm

"In two of the cases documented by Human Rights Watch, IDF soldiers coerced children under the age of eighteen to approach the houses of "wanted" Palestinians. Children are entitled to all the protections of IHL, enhanced by special protections derived from their status as children."

http://www.hrw.org/reports/2002/isra...htm#P176_25821

For much more, see the report "HUMAN SHIELD: Use of Palestinian Civilians as Human Shields in Violation of High Court of Justice Order" by B’TSELEM (B’TSELEM is the Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories,founded in 1989 by a group of lawyers, authors, academics, journalists, and Members of Knesset. "B’Tselem documents human rights abuses in the Occupied Territories and brings them to the attention of policymakers and the general public. Its data are based on independent fieldwork and research, offi cial sources, the media, and data from Palestinian and Israeli human rights organizations.")

The B'Tselem findings are without doubt:

"During the al-Aqsa intifada, IDF soldiers have used Palestinian civilians as human shields. This practice has been most common during IDF operations in Palestinian population centers, such as Operation Defensive Shield and Operation Determined Path. The method is the same each time: soldiers pick a civilian at random and force him to protect them by doing dangerous tasks that put his life at risk."

http://www.btselem.org/Download/2002...Shield_Eng.pdf

The latest report on such Israeli crimes is dated only a few days ago:

"20 July 2006: Israeli Soldiers use civilians as Human Shields in Beit Hanun"

http://www.btselem.org/english/Human...Beit_Hanun.asp

Since that seems to be such a general practise, it wouldn't be far-fetched to think that the same Israeli troops are using Lebanese civilians as human shields now that they are invading and occupying Lebanon? That is far more conceivable than to think that someone would use his own people, his own families as human shields. (Even if the Israeli troops have committed many atrocities, I would dismiss as war propaganda any claim from an enemy of Israel that Israeli troops are using Israeli civilians as human shields. On the other hand, I would find it conceivable to think that Israel's enemies could use Israeli civilians as human shields, if they had the possibility.)

I would like Jpsartre, who raised the topic on human shields, to comment on the Israeli use of human shields according to the reliable sources above.

Personally, I am disgusted by the use of human shields, regardless who does it. I already am disgusted by both sides - Israel and Hezbollah - in the present conflict. But since jpsartre is so clearly biased towards Israel, it would be interesting to see what he/she has to say about the Israeli use of human shields, and if he/she thinks that Israel is using human shields in Lebanon at this very moment.

CHUQ · #92 (**permalink**) 07-25-2006

To Jews, the Stern Gang were partisans, to the rest of the world they were terrorists. Were they not involved in the murder of 254 men, women and children in 1948 at the town of Deir Yassin? And during that war they were part of A 'legitmate' government.

No matter what you want to call them, a terroist is a terrorist.

FreeThinker · #93 (**permalink**) 07-25-2006

Israelis accused of 'human shields' tactic

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5212870.stm

The Israeli army has been accused of using Palestinian civilians as human shields in an operation in northern Gaza.
According to the Israeli human rights group, B'tselem, six civilians including two minors were subjected to the illegal tactic during an incursion into the town of Beit Hanoun last week.

adaher · #94 (**permalink**) 07-25-2006

Actually, some soldiers have been accused of this tactic.

Unlike with Hamas, where this is permitted all the time.

jpsartre12 · #95 (**permalink**) 07-25-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxture

Well spoken. The question however is if our friend from Israel understands what we mean. I will give jpsartre an example:

You resort to evidently biased sources, including war Greuel propaganda. Please study the following sources:

"US Army Uses Iraqi Children As Human Shields Again"

http://raedinthemiddle.blogspot.com/...-as-human.html

"now the [US] military is using Iraqis as human shields on the streets and highways in an effort to protect themselves from attacks by the resistance."

http://blog.newstandardnews.net/iraq...es/000356.html

Well, those evidently are other pieces of biased propaganda. You would be justified to dismiss that as evidence of a US policy of using Iraqi children as human shields. Maybe now you can understand why resorting to such invalid sources only is harmful to your cause?

Nevertheless, since you are so interested in the question on human shields, hopefully in principle, here are some indeed reliable sources on the use of human shields in a conflict. You probably were not aware of the fact that if anyone is using human shields in the present conflict, it is the Israeli side:

Human Rights Watch:

"In the four cases researched in detail by Human Rights Watch, eyewitnesses described a night of panic and terror, including death threats, house demolitions, and wide-scale arrests. In each of these cases, the IDF routinely coerced civilians to perform life-endangering acts that assisted IDF military operations. [. . .] This report finds that the IDF is systematically coercing Palestinian civilians to assist military operations. This practice violates a fundamental principle of IHL: that of civilian immunity. It violates Israel's obligation to protect and respect civilian persons under Article 27 of the Fourth Geneva Convention,3 and recklessly exposes civilians to danger. The threats and coercion used by the IDF to compel civilians to assist them are explicitly prohibited under Article 31 of the Convention."

http://www.hrw.org/reports/2002/israel2/israel0402.htm

"In two of the cases documented by Human Rights Watch, IDF soldiers coerced children under the age of eighteen to approach the houses of "wanted" Palestinians. Children are entitled to all the protections of IHL, enhanced by special protections derived from their status as children."

http://www.hrw.org/reports/2002/isra...htm#P176_25821

For much more, see the report "HUMAN SHIELD: Use of Palestinian Civilians as Human Shields in Violation of High Court of Justice Order" by B’TSELEM (B’TSELEM is the Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories,founded in 1989 by a group of lawyers, authors, academics, journalists, and Members of Knesset. "B’Tselem documents human rights abuses in the Occupied Territories and brings them to the attention of policymakers and the general public. Its data are based on independent fieldwork and research, offi cial sources, the media, and data from Palestinian and Israeli human rights organizations.")

The B'Tselem findings are without doubt:

"During the al-Aqsa intifada, IDF soldiers have used Palestinian civilians as human shields. This practice has been most common during IDF operations in Palestinian population centers, such as Operation Defensive Shield and Operation Determined Path. The method is the same each time: soldiers pick a civilian at random and force him to protect them by doing dangerous tasks that put his life at risk."

http://www.btselem.org/Download/2002...Shield_Eng.pdf

The latest report on such Israeli crimes is dated only a few days ago:

"20 July 2006: Israeli Soldiers use civilians as Human Shields in Beit Hanun"

http://www.btselem.org/english/Human...Beit_Hanun.asp

Since that seems to be such a general practise, it wouldn't be far-fetched to think that the same Israeli troops are using Lebanese civilians as human shields now that they are invading and occupying Lebanon? That is far more conceivable than to think that someone would use his own people, his own families as human shields. (Even if the Israeli troops have committed many atrocities, I would dismiss as war propaganda any claim from an enemy of Israel that Israeli troops are using Israeli civilians as human shields. On the other hand, I would find it conceivable to think that Israel's enemies could use Israeli civilians as human shields, if they had the possibility.)

I would like Jpsartre, who raised the topic on human shields, to comment on the Israeli use of human shields according to the reliable sources above.

Personally, I am disgusted by the use of human shields, regardless who does it. I already am disgusted by both sides - Israel and Hezbollah - in the present conflict. But since jpsartre is so clearly biased towards Israel, it would be interesting to see what he/she has to say about the Israeli use of human shields, and if he/she thinks that Israel is using human shields in Lebanon at this very moment.

First, make up your mind. When I used HRW as a source, you jumped all over it. Now that you found a passage that supports your position, it's acceptable? Isn't that just a tad hyporcitical?

Next, I never claimed that Israel never used civilians as human shields. In fact, I know that Israel has used Palestinians as human shields. The difference is that Hezbollah uses their own people, not the enemies. While I, too, think that the use of human shields is inhumane, there is a difference. Hezbollah built its military infrastructure IN peoples' houses just as Iraq did under SH. Isreal stored its munitions next to an Arab village as a deterrent, in one instance that I'm aware of. They weren't using their own people as shields.
Israel did that purposely to deter attacks. They weren't intentionally trying to draw fire. Hezbollah has done it to insure high civilian casualties in order to make Israel look like the bad guy.
As for your "sources" on Americans use of Iraq civilians as shields, you use blogs?

I purposefully stayed away from blogs because of their unknown veracity.
This one in particular has zero credibility. It asserts that US soldiers give out candy to keep car bombers from bombing their vehicles and uses the quote" "I'm going to probably buy alot of candy when I goto the PX in the camp. That way, I can hand it out to the kids. They'll be more likely to help us avoid things we wouldn't otherwise be able to avoid if not for them" as proof that they're being intentionally used as human shields. That's just plain BULLSHIT! The reason that they are handing out candy is to gain support from the kids so that the kids will TELL THEM if something bad is likely to occur. That's a totally different scenario than the one the biased blogger would have the reader believe. It's not an uncommon practice in any theater to try to gain local support in order that they will tip soldiers off about possible harm.

http://raedinthemiddle.blogspot.com/...-as-human.html

Maxture · #96 (**permalink**) 07-25-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpsartre12

First, make up your mind. When I used HRW as a source, you jumped all over it. Now that you found a passage that supports your position, it's acceptable? Isn't that just a tad hyporcitical?]

No, I didn't dismiss the Human Rights Watch. All I said was: "nowhere does it contain an independent statement which for certain asserts that the Hezbollah is using human shields".

Quote:

In fact, I know that Israel has used Palestinians as human shields.

Wow, now that was a brave admission! Now do you support that?

Quote:

The difference is that Hezbollah uses their own people, not the enemies..

As we have concluded, there is NO evidence which supports that war Greuel propaganda. Not even you have been able to find anything credible.

Quote:

As for your "sources" on Americans use of Iraq civilians as shields, you use blogs?

I purposefully stayed away from blogs because of their unknown veracity. This one in particular has zero credibility..

Please, I used that as an example of the zero credibility of biased sources, particularly in a war. Please re-read what I wrote: "Well, those evidently are other pieces of biased propaganda. You would be justified to dismiss that as evidence of a US policy of using Iraqi children as human shields. Maybe now you can understand why resorting to such invalid sources only is harmful to your cause?"

Just like your so-called "sources" on the Hezbollah's alleged use of human shields: zero credibility.

So far, no one in the whole world has been able to come up with any credible source on Hezbollah's alleged use of human shields. Your method only serves to convince the doubtful that there really is no evidence of such a murderous tactic.

I am totally opposed to Hezbollah's ideas and methods, but we don't need Israeli lies. (I also am opposed to the ideas of the state of Israel and many of its methods, and I don't think we need lies in order to condemn the policy of the state of Isreal.)

Either you go and find evidence on Hezbollah's alleged use of human shields, or you admit that the only side which is using human shields is the Israeli side. This is the position which any intellectually honest person has to hold, until new evidence arrives.

jpsartre12 · #97 (**permalink**) 07-25-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxture

No, I didn't dismiss the Human Rights Watch. All I said was: "nowhere does it contain an independent statement which for certain asserts that the Hezbollah is using human shields".

The fact that Hezbollah placed its missiles in crowded neighborhoods and launches from there is proof, IMO.

Quote:

Wow, now that was a brave admission! Now do you support that?

I believe that I said I didn't support it. It's been a long day. I was in an auto assembly plant fixing a problem from very early this AM.

Quote:

As we have concluded, there is NO evidence which supports that war Greuel propaganda. Not even you have been able to find anything credible.

The evidence is the fact that Hezbollah is launching their missile attacks from neighborhoods. That is a violation of international law. The attack on such sites is supported by international law, however.

Quote:

Please, I used that as an example of the zero credibility of biased sources, particularly in a war. Please re-read what I wrote: "Well, those evidently are other pieces of biased propaganda. You would be justified to dismiss that as evidence of a US policy of using Iraqi children as human shields. Maybe now you can understand why resorting to such invalid sources only is harmful to your cause?"

As I said, my initial post was made in haste from work while multi-tasking. My mistake.

Quote:

Just like your so-called "sources" on the Hezbollah's alleged use of human shields: zero credibility.

So far, no one in the whole world has been able to come up with any credible source on Hezbollah's alleged use of human shields. Your method only serves to convince the doubtful that there really is no evidence of such a murderous tactic.

I am totally opposed to Hezbollah's ideas and methods, but we don't need Israeli lies. (I also am opposed to the ideas of the state of Israel and many of its methods, and I don't think we need lies in order to condemn the policy of the state of Isreal.)

Either you go and find evidence on Hezbollah's alleged use of human shields, or you admit that the only side which is using human shields is the Israeli side. This is the position which any intellectually honest person has to hold, until new evidence arrives.

Since you didn't dismiss HRW:

Quote:

Is Hezbollah’s firing of rockets into Israel lawful under international humanitarian law?

As a party to the armed conflict, Hezbollah has a legal duty to protect the life, health and safety of civilians and other non-combatants. The targeting of military installations and other military objectives is permitted but Hezbollah must take all feasible precautions to avoid civilian harm and is prohibited from targeting civilians, launching indiscriminate attacks, or attacking military objects if the anticipated harm to civilians and other noncombatants will be disproportionate to the expected military advantage. Hezbollah’s commanders must choose the means of attack that can be directed at military targets and will minimize incidental harm to civilians. If the weapons used are so inaccurate that they cannot be directed at military targets without imposing a substantial risk of civilian harm, then they should not be deployed. Deliberately attacking civilians is in all circumstances prohibited and a war crime.

While Human Rights Watch has not yet conducted a field examination to determine whether any of these attacks aimed to target a military object, preliminary information suggests that rockets fired by Hezbollah may be so inaccurate as to be incapable of being targeted, but are rather used to target a generalized area. As Human Rights Watch said in a 1997 report on Lebanon and Israel, “Katyushas are inaccurate weapons with an indiscriminate effect when fired into areas where civilians are concentrated. The use of such weapons in this manner is a blatant violation of international humanitarian law.” That is, their use in civilian areas violates the prohibition on indiscriminate attacks and would be a war crime. Customary international law prohibits such bombardment near or in any area containing a concentration of civilians, even if there are believed to be military objectives in the area.

Can Israel attack neighborhoods that house Hezbollah leaders or offices? And what are Hezbollah’s obligations regarding the use of civilian areas for military activities?

Where the targeting of a combatant takes place in an urban area, all parties must be aware of their obligations to protect the civilian population, as the bombing of urban areas significantly increases the risks to the civilian population. International humanitarian law obliges all belligerents to avoid harm to civilians or civilian objects.

The defending party – in the case of Beirut, Hezbollah – must take all necessary precautions to protect civilians against the dangers resulting from armed hostilities, and must never use the presence of civilians to shield themselves from attack. That requires positioning its military assets, troops, and commanders as much as possible outside of populated areas. The use of human shields is a war crime.
http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2006...ebano13748.htm

Maxture · #98 (**permalink**) 07-26-2006

No credible source states that the Hezbollah actually is using human shields.

It is, on the other hand, proven beyond doubt, that the use of human shields is widely used by Israeli soldiers.

It is also a fact that both the Hezbollah's and Israel's bombardments of civilian targets is a war crime. I'm sure that the only reason why Israel so far has killed more civilians than Hezbollah has, is because Israel is able to do so.

Hezbollah is an unscrupulously murderous, ultra-conservative group which I am politically totally opposed to.

The Israeli government is an unscrupulously murderous, imperialist regime which I am politically totally opposed to.

The war in Lebanon is a typical colonial war, like the British colonial war against the Zulus. I think that anyone can say that the British were unjust to wage that colonial war, and could still be opposed to the Zulu king's undemocratic rule.

I hope that the outcome of all of this will be that the Israeli people will rise against the present government and state, and that the Lebanese people will rise against the present government and state, including the Hezbollah. In fact, all of the present Palestine/Israel and Lebanon could live together as one united country. But the chauvinists won't let that happen. Just like in the case with the Balkans. You will never get peace as long as you continue to allow the chauvinists to rule. To focus on non-issues like the Israeli war Greuel propaganda of the Hezbollah's alleged use of human shields is only to deflect the discussion from the main problem. Sad that so many Israelis can't understand that the present regime's policy is the problem. (Oh, I wish the state of Israel would have been founded on German territory instead! Wouldn't that have made things much easier!)

daisym · #99 (**permalink**) 07-26-2006

Quote:

I hope that the outcome of all of this will be that the Israeli people will rise against the present government and state, and that the Lebanese people will rise against the present government and state, including the Hezbollah.

Fat chance. Today there have been demonstrations IN SUPPORT of Hesbollah in beirut. Hesbollah have been very much involved in assisting refugees and helping to organise shelters.

terrorists they may be, but they know how to win popularity contests in the local community.

jpsartre12 · #**100** (**permalink**) 07-26-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by daisym

Fat chance. Today there have been demonstrations IN SUPPORT of Hesbollah in beirut. Hesbollah have been very much involved in assisting refugees and helping to organise shelters.
terrorists they may be, but they know how to win popularity contests in the local community.

The least they could do is help the people that hid their Katyusha missiles and other armament in their HOUSES for them.

Yes, houses. The Israeli army is finding

Quote:

The Israeli military has largely been unable to stop these strikes. The reason is that unlike conventional armies, Hezbollah doesn't keep its weapons in armories. It hides them in the homes of supporters, in remote valleys and caves, and in small factories and industrial workshops scattered across Lebanon, according to Israeli and Lebanese military experts and the group itself. Ardent members willing to die for the movement are assigned to protect these sites, many of which are said to be booby-trapped.Karby leggett, Wall Street Journal
Posted: Mon, 17 Jul 2006 07:49 | © Moneyweb Holdings Limited, 1997-2006

And it looks like Hezbollah is getting the shit kicked out of them despite claims to the contrary. First they say they're ready for a full-scale war, now they're ready to negotiate. My opinion. Pummel them into Hell. See how many virgins are really waiting for them.

Quote:

Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, told a Lebanese newspaper yesterday that his organization sought an immediate cease-fire and would accept the Lebanese government as its negotiator. It was a dramatic change of tone for the Hezbollah leader, who 10 days ago said in an audiotape addressed to Israel: "You wanted an open war, and we are ready for an open war." Sheik Nasrallah, who is in hiding after attacks on his home and headquarters, offered no details. But Lebanese officials said the militant Shi'ite group still insisted that any deal include a prisoner exchange, the payment of reparations and the withdrawal of Israeli troops from the contested Shebaa Farms region -- conditions Israel is unlikely to accept. Casualties from the exchange of rocket fire were lighter than in past days after many civilians have moved away from the border. Thirteen persons were slightly wounded in Israel, where 39 have been killed, including 22 soldiers. The Lebanese death toll stands at almost 400, including 20 soldiers and 11 Hezbollah militants.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/world...5253-8217r.htm

Maxture · #**101** (**permalink**) 07-26-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpsartre12

And it looks like Hezbollah is getting the shit kicked out of them despite claims to the contrary. First they say they're ready for a full-scale war, now they're ready to negotiate. My opinion. Pummel them into Hell. See how many virgins are really waiting for them.

Who is is getting the shit kicked out (to use your cynical phrase)? Please listen to the news.

Quote:

A well-planned Hizbullah ambush on the outskirts of the southern Lebanese village of Bint Jbail Wednesday devastated Battalion 51 of the Golani Brigade, leaving eight soldiers, including three officers, dead and 22 wounded.
Later, a paratrooper officer was killed and three of his men were wounded, two seriously, in a separate firefight on the outskirts of nearby Maroun al-Ras.
Dozens of Hizbullah gunmen armed with antitank missiles and machine guns and geared up in night-vision goggles and bulletproof vests set a trap for a force of Golani infantrymen led by Lt.-Col. Yaniv Asor, commander of Battalion 51. At 5 a.m. Wednesday, Asor and his men asked the Golani command center for permission to enter an area of the outskirts of Bint Jbail. Col. Tamir Yidai, commander of the brigade, gave the green light for the operation.
Asor and his men moved quickly through approximately 15 one-story homes. But as the troops moved through the narrow alleyways, a strong Hizbullah force sent a wave of gunfire and missiles at the force, killing and wounding several soldiers in the first moments of the fight. As Asor and his men fought to regain control of the situation, other Hizbullah cells outflanked them and opened fire on the force as well as other IDF positions in the town.
The battle lasted for several hours during which Asor and his men sustained heavy casualties and killed at least 40 Hizbullah guerrillas, some in gunbattles at point-blank range. Then the evacuation of the wounded began, which lasted six hours due to incessant enemy fire. Four IAF helicopter pilots risked their lives by landing in enemy territory.
Men from the Golani's elite reconnaissance unit and from Battalion 51 carried stretchers with their wounded comrades for three kilometers to the helicopters, which landed for just under one minute at a time beneath a cover of smoke grenades and massive artillery fire before taking off to evacuate the wounded to Israeli hospitals.
Meanwhile at the Golani Brigade's command center, emotions ran high as word came in of the fierce gunbattle and the heavy casualties. Soldiers ran back and forth with maps and officers screamed into encrypted cellular phones coordinating the evacuation of the wounded.
At one point, Brig.-Gen. Gal Hirsh, commander of Division 91, stepped out of the command center to update Chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. Dan Halutz. "We can't land the helicopters," he said. "The fighting is too intense."
On Tuesday, things in the town had looked entirely different. The IDF, senior officers announced matter-of-factly, had it surrounded and were in control of the town. "The town is in our control," Hirsh said Tuesday. "The work is almost completed and the terrorists are fleeing." Some terrorists, however, seem to have remained, with deadly results.
The Golani's fight didn't end the combat Bint Jbail. Wednesday evening, after the IDF had once again declared it had secured the town, a Paratrooper force nearby was hit by a Sagger antitank missile.
One officer was killed and three soldiers were wounded in the attack and in the gunfight that ensued.
A high-ranking source in the Northern Command told The Jerusalem Post Wednesday that Bint Jbail could not be attacked by air since there were still several hundred civilians there. The officer said that the fighting in the town would continue at least for a day or two.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satelli...cle%2FShowFull

Quote:

One-by-one the wounded were carried out on stretchers. One young soldier had blood streaming down his leg, which was bound with a tourniquet. Another lay still on a stretcher, only his twitching legs indicating that he was alive.
Having brought back his wounded comrades, a tank driver sat on the turret clutching his head between his gloved hands and crying while two crew members tried to console him.
Ambulances rushed the wounded over roads dug up by tank tracks. They drove past fields left charred and barren by fires from hundreds of Hezbollah rockets and through the empty streets of ghost towns — their inhabitants hiding in bomb shelters.
Helicopters airlifted the seriously wounded out of the area.
In the recovery room, another soldier, 21-year-old Yishai Green, lay in a bed with two large Israeli flags hanging next to him.
A group of French Jews on a solidarity visit tried to cheer him up with balloons, and another man went from room to room playing a guitar.
"It's a real mess and I am not allowed to talk about it," was all Green had to say about the battle for Bint Jbail
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060724/...ing_the_battle

Quote:

Israel's battle-weary Bokim Battalion, which lost two soldiers in Hezbollah ambushes Monday, returned from the fighting exhausted Tuesday afternoon, lounging in the shade of a kiwi grove and hanging their sweat-soaked uniforms out to dry. They described a complex attack in which one of their tanks, sent to evacuate wounded ground fighters, was pounded by three Hezbollah missiles. A second tank struck a mine or other explosive as it rushed to provide aid, they said.
"My radio only lets me hear people inside the vehicle, so I didn't realize right away that they had died. Then I just started to cry. I couldn't stop," said Avi Chai, 19, a tank driver whose hands and arms were still black with smoke and grease.
In recent days, Israeli news outlets, which had largely lined up behind the army's conduct of the war, have begun to ask why an army that once defeated the armies of several Arab neighbors in six days was finding it so difficult to push one militia off Israel's border.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...501400_pf.html

Haaretz describes the situation as "Firepower versus brainpower" and concludes that the IDF "is not functioning", that Hezbollah has "the upper hand" against the IDF. Read the whole article here:

Quote:

Firepower versus brainpower

By Yoel Marcus

Two weeks after Israel set out to defeat Hezbollah, its military achievements are pretty limited. A country that stood up to seven Arab nations in the War of Independence, a war of the "few against the many," with an army that pulverized the invading forces of three Arab nations in the span of six days, is now facing an embarrassing role reversal: a war of the "many against the few" in which Israel is on the floorboards.

Who would have believed that a guerrilla organization with a few hundred regular fighters, something like a brigade and a half, could paralyze half a country, firing off hundreds of missiles every day? A total of 2,200 by Sunday morning, says the defense minister. Who would have believed that cities like Safed, Acre, Nahariya, Tiberias and especially Haifa, the capital of the North, would wake up every morning to the sound of sirens and deadly rocket fire that would turn tens of thousands of people into refugees and shut down life in a large part of the country? And that's even before Hezbollah has tried to use its long-range missiles on Tel Aviv.

Who would have believed that the Israel Defense Forces, the army that is prepared for large-scale wars, that Iran fears will attack its nuclear facilities, that can drop 23 tons of bombs in a single night, is incapable of stopping Hezbollah's missile fire? How is that as soon as the IDF announces Hezbollah's TV station has been bombed, Hassan Nasrallah pops up in blooming health to continue his taunts against us?
Israel went to war with the goal of wiping out Hezbollah, a hostile militia operating on its border, in response to provocation and the kidnapping of soldiers made possible by the sluggishness and routine that has become widespread in the IDF in recent months. It did so with international backing, with President Bush leading the pack, and the support of most Israeli citizens.

Bush and the public assumed that the army knew what it was doing, and that Israel, with its superiority in manpower, weaponry and technology, would be able to put an end to Hezbollah as a menace to Israel. Little by little, however, a worrying picture has begun to emerge: Instead of an army that is small but smart, we are catching glimpses of an army that is big, rich and dumb.

Take the bizarre appearances of IDF top brass on television: The commander of the Home Front, who stands there handing out high marks to the Israeli public, seemingly unaware that the moment people sense the army is not functioning, they will take to their heels - not only leaving their homes but fleeing the country, following tens of thousands of tourists who have already hightailed it out of here. The chief of staff, who had to say that "we're going to turn Lebanon back into what it was 20 years ago," and now threatens to blow up a 10-floor building for every missile. The district commander who declares: "We don't do body counts in the middle of a war," an improved version of the comment of Benny Gantz, who was a brigadier general in 2001: "When you chop down trees, splinters fly," totally forgetting that the splinters are human beings.

We have a chief of staff who looks like he gets up every morning and agonizes over what to wear - his blue uniform or his khakis. A chief of staff who delivers state-of-the-union addresses that should be the job of the prime minister, and spends whole days touring with Channel 2 correspondent Ronny Daniel. In his observations to the media, Brigadier General (res.) Rafi Noy is right when he says that Hezbollah, with its hidden arsenals, continues to enjoy the upper hand, while the mighty IDF still has far to go to knock it out of commission.

Unlike some of my colleagues, I believe that Israel is fighting a no-choice war that we must do everything possible to win. Air strikes, ground operations - whatever it takes so that Hezbollah, exhausted and beaten, pulls back and a multinational force is deployed along the international border together with the Lebanese Army, in keeping with Security Council Resolution 1559.

If Hezbollah does not cooperate with a UN-mediated agreement stipulating that it give up its heavy weapons, and refuses to stay north of the Litani River, the IDF will have no choice but to keep up the attacks and pound away at Hezbollah, crushing it outpost by outpost. The rules of the game dictated by Hezbollah are going to have to change. A status quo ante is out of the question.

The conflict with Hezbollah cannot be allowed to deteriorate into a war of attrition. It must not be expanded beyond its stated goals. And the Israeli public must not be overly put to the test, lest the "wonderful home front" blow up in the government's face.

The trouble is that we don't have all the time in the world. Condeleezza Rice is on her way. She will shuttle back and forth, back and forth, until the moment comes for a cease-fire agreement. We can only hope that the army reverts to its old self and has the wisdom and good sense to know what to do and when to do it, to produce the desired outcome.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/742261.html

jpsartre12 · #**102** (**permalink**) 07-26-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxture

Who is is getting the shit kicked out (to use your cynical phrase)? Please listen to the news.

Haaretz describes the situation as "Firepower versus brainpower" and concludes that the IDF "is not functioning", that Hezbollah has "the upper hand" against the IDF. Read the whole article here:

I'm glad to see that you have dropped the facade and have exposed your true self. Now, I don't have to pull any punches.
Israel isn't used to fighting this type of asymetrical war. In the past, they rolled over Arabs like they were blacktopping roads. Now, with their every action being examined under the world's microscope, that have to be more politically correct. I watched Hezbollah supporters bragging about Hezbollah killing 20 IDF soldiers yesterday while in a Detroit area auto assembly plant. Since I wasn't on home turf, I didn't remind them that their fearless leader was still in hiding.

CHUQ · #**103** (**permalink**) 07-27-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpsartre12

I'm glad to see that you have dropped the facade and have exposed your true self. Now, I don't have to pull any punches.
Israel isn't used to fighting this type of asymetrical war. In the past, they rolled over Arabs like they were blacktopping roads. Now, with their every action being examined under the world's microscope, that have to be more politically correct. I watched Hezbollah supporters bragging about Hezbollah killing 20 IDF soldiers yesterday while in a Detroit area auto assembly plant. Since I wasn't on home turf, I didn't remind them that their fearless leader was still in hiding.