Wow, you are right Iran is the just about only country in the M.E. that France hasn't sold arms to....I guess the shady oil deals like the $54,000,000,000 deal with "Total" oil company between Iran, Russia and China - they make enough money through Iran..they don't need to sell arms to them.

I agree that if we warn the civilian population in an attempt to reduce civilian casualties (not that anyone will acknowledge this) we also allow most of the Hizbullah fighters and leaders to escape. But destroying buildings used by Hizbullah and forcing them to relocate causes a great deal of disorder in an organization. Even a flexible organization like Hizbullah relies on a chain of command and communication between its fighters in the front, the leadership, and so on. Forcing them to move from place to place was another way of keeping them off balance. They proved very resilient and quick to adapt, but that does not mean that it did not make their lives a lot harder having to move from place to place, losing some of the infrastructure they've spent years building, including command centers, storage facilities, bunkers, and yes, their homes too.

What would you have us do? Attack without giving any warning to civilians?

But then we would be no better than most of our neighbors.

We could have turned Beirut into a new Dresden, killing tens of thousands of people. But we didn't want to kill any civilians. Not that people who share your opinions recognize that. And we don't do it for other people's recognition, we do it just so we can look ourselves in the mirror. Don't get me wrong, it's not that we don't care what other people think of us. But when people from Germany, France, Britain, Belgium Russia, China, any Arab country, or even Canada talk to us about morality, don't think that we don't remember what you did throughout your history as well.

Changed their tactics? They had those mobile rocket launchers all along. They've been using them for years. They're just difficult to destroy (see U.S. and British efforts to destroy Saddam's launchers in Gulf War 1).

Also you should see some of the footage of mobile launchers being destroyed. The IDF managed to get most of the long range missiles. It was the short range Katyusha rockets which were the biggest problem since you could literally shoot them from your back yard or out of a window (in a few cases) and then go back to being a civilian.

Exactly! Bravo PN......Just know that there are those who know the truth on this matter......And hope you remain safe.


j-mac

__________________
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling, which thinks that nothing is worth war, is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.


- John Stuart Mill

Thank you. Take care.

Halliburton did deals in Iran under Cheney. Pot stop calling Kettle Black...

Using Cluster bamb in built up area should be a war crime. It is vile and results in kids limbs being blown to pieces.. Not all parts of the cluster explode on impact but blow up later when distrubed by usually a civillian. This was done by Rumsfeld in Iraq and was just a vile.

Some posts Earlier stated that there is nothing wrong with suppling Israel with arms and they using them against Civillians. I akin to saying there is nothing wrong with suppling Al'Queda with arms to blow up an Americain building. It is of course wrong.

Israel didn't kill more Civillians because they knew that the US couldn't justify it any more internationally. Israel is master at running this fine line; They did as much as they could get away with.

The US has to get a grip here and understand US interests and Israeli interests are not the same in the region.. As soon as they accept that things can get better...

Let me say that I think the state of Israel belongs exactly where it is, for the reason that it is there and has been for over 50 years. What was there 2000 years ago has nothing to do with it. It may have been a crime to take the area from it's inhabitants back then in the 40's, but that is over and done with, and you now have a country where most of the population was born there, and have spent there whole life there, and that means they can't "go home" because they are home.

Strategically, Israel has a military advantage, and while that is the case now, and has been for over 50 years, it is by no means certain that it will continue to be the case forever. If Israel lives in a state of perpetual conflict it will exist as long as it holds the advantage, and not a moment longer.
If Israel makes peace, it can stay there forever, and the key to that is making peace with the Palestinians, because if they are happy, the rest of the arab world and the rest of the Islamic world will melt into indifference.
I understand that it is a difficult process, that many have tried and failed at, but it is the only long term strategy that will work.

That is why I see all these flare ups as detrimental to the long term survival of Israel, because this type of violence creates the hate that will fuel the next round of violence, the cycle has to stop, and the destruction of so many homes and the deaths of so many civilians is not the path to peace.

__________________
“ The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.”

Adam Smith , The Wealth of Nations 1776

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics"
FDR's second Inaugural Address

The first thing would have been to warn them before bombing all the routes out of the city, not to mention gas stations, rail lines....

Or better yet, give the civilians a warning prior to attacks (read before destroying all routes out of the area) with enough time to evacuate before bombing. If this were the case I would guarantee that Israel would have won the war. There was no imminent threat, and the immediate assult did not result in getting the captives back anyway, a warning would have changed everything.

__________________
Two-thirds of the world's lawyers practice in the US

I've been around since "Buy American" meant "Made in the USA".

...it's about time for AI...Amnesty international joins HRW and accuses Israel of War Crimes ...

=Peace Now;

What would you have us do? Attack without giving any warning to civilians?

But then we would be no better than most of our neighbors.

What makes you think you are now??? I certainly Don"t

Lol. A classic example of Zionist arrogance. They believe that they can ignore international law and yet still , somehow, be respected.

OK Matt - so in YOUR OPINION this justifies Israel using US weapons to bomb civilians?

where is the evidence of hesbollah CARPET BOMBING Israeli cities?

when you can shoew me that, I'll concede you have a point - however even with the discrepancy in death tolls, the majority of casualies on the Israeli side were military personnel, so it seems unlikely you can find it.

you are trying to defend the indefensible. the issue is that civilians were targeted. do you support the DELIBERATE trageting of civilians by YOUR ALLIES using YOUR WEAPONS?

Matt, 23 years ago is a long time. It is long enough to address issues if you are prepared to do so.

If I were American I would be concerned that anti American sentiment in Lebanon is greater now - and is being exacerbated by Israel's use of your weapons against its civilians, and, more importantly - by your governments delaying the cease fire - action which costs hundreds of lives and billions of dollars of damage - because 'Israel has the right to defend itself' ...

think about it. the devastation to the Lebanese people was far greater than that your country suffered in 9/11 - yet look at the differences in response.

how do you think this will influence people's attitude to the US?

this thread is about the bombing of Beirut. and the fact that US weapons were used in attacks on civilians. it isn't about hesbollah - you want to discuss that - there are plenty of other threads.

not just among militant islamic people - more moderate Muslims - who probably would be allies against extremism - look askance at what is happening now.

They don't want radical Islam dominating their lives, but HOW CAN THEY accept what is being done in the name of 'the war on terror?'

it looks like a war against Islamic people - not a war against extremist Islam.