Terrorists Win?

MsSparkie · 08-14-2006, 06:25 PM

Hezbollah is now the rulers of Lebanon. Sharia is not far behind. Israel is being forced by the world to stop their defensive action against these terrorists. (Now why will the world not help in Darfur?)

The Times August 14, 2006

Lebanon's 'real' soldiers are put in their place From Daniel McGrory in Beirut TODAY was supposed to be the day when the muchmaligned army of Lebanon took control of its borders and policed the UN ceasefire.

Instead, its military commanders were left humiliated and its troops stranded as Hezbollah told them not to try to disarm its fighters.

The first infantry units were preparing to head south yesterday when Hezbollah demonstrated who exercised the real control by announcing that it had no intention of surrendering a single weapon. General Michel Sleiman, the commander-in- chief of the Lebanese Army, and his lieutenants had been invited to join in Cabinet meetings to finalise plans to deploy their 15,000-strong force in a buffer zone south of the Litani river. However, they ended up being lectured by Hezbollah’s two Cabinet ministers in the coalition Government on what the army could and could not do.

In Beirut, Western diplomats said that it raised serious concerns about the army’s ability and appetite to deal with Hezbollah. The Lebanese Government was left struggling to maintain a united front after unanimously backing the UN resolution on Saturday.

Sami Haddad, the Economics Minister, said: “The Government can’t force Hezbollah to abide by the ceasefire. It’s unnatural to have an armed political party that is in Cabinet and does not abide by what the Government of Lebanon wants.”

Nabih Berri, the Speaker of parliament and the Shia politician best placed to negotiate with Hezbollah, asked for 48 hours to broker a deal.

Without Lebanese troops or the international force in place in the intended demilitarised zone, there is little serious prospect of the ceasefire holding for long.

The stand-off came soon after Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, said on Hezbollah’s television network that his fighters would respect the ceasefire and described the deployment of Lebanese and foreign troops as “an honourable move”. He said that the deployment was “an achievement for Hezbollah and the Lebanon. It resulted from the steadfastness of the Lebanese people and the heroes of the resistance.”

There were even optimistic murmurs about trying to integrate Hezbollah fighters into the army. But Hezbollah appear to have decided that the demand that it disarm and leave the 20km (12- mile) “arms-free zone” would have portrayed it as losers in the conflict.

The army has lost 20 men, despite not firing a shot in anger. Two more soldiers were wounded yesterday near the Syrian border when an Israeli airstrike hit their 4x4.

Elias Murr, the Defence Minister, said in the early days of the conflict: “We will defend our land until the last soldier, and we will pay any price for our land.”

Yet troops retreated to their barracks or lounged on armoured vehicles in the shade in a token effort to police checkpoints in the capital or protect key buildings.

President Lahoud admitted to a senior official last week: “If we had ordered our army to fight, they would have been wiped out.”

Elias Hanna, a retired Lebanese army general, told The Times: “Sending 15,000 troops south is a political solution, not a military one. It’s more a PR stunt. The army needs the international force to help it. The key objective is to keep the army united, and not have it split on factional lines as it did in the civil war.” The force’s equipment is poor, and certainly no match for the Israelis, and it has neither an air force nor a navy.

One soldier told The Times that Hezbollah was better armed and organised, adding that he was reluctant to confront what he called “the resistance fighters”.

A colleague added: “We want to be able to go anywhere we want in Lebanon and be the only force inside our borders carrying guns. What we don’t know is when we will be able to do that.”

Another said that his brother and a cousin were fighting for Hezbollah. His cousin was injured last week and moved to a Hezbollah clinic in a secret location. The soldier said: “I can't turn a gun on the resistance, because they are family.”

richlevy · 08-14-2006, 08:58 PM

If the Lebanese army moved in without an international force, they would have been pounded on by Hezbollah and the Israelis. Hezbollah isn't going to disarm because they know that it won't stop Israel from trying to destroy them, so why even make the attempt. Even asking was pretty stupid, since the inevitable answer caused a loss of face for the army.

It's too bad, since without the disarm request it might have been possible to set up the 12 mile DMZ.

MsSparkie · 08-14-2006, 09:33 PM

By what right do they bear arms? The right of bullies and thugs?

They need to disarm, weapon wise and hatred wise. They've made enough trouble haven't they?

Urbane Guerrilla · 08-14-2006, 11:11 PM

Every event in Lebanon the past month has been helpful to Iran, and Iran only. The sooner Iran's antidemocracy (and thereby antihuman) mullahcracy goes...

JayMcGee · 08-16-2006, 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MsSparkie

By what right do they bear arms? The right of bullies and thugs?

They need to disarm, weapon wise and hatred wise. They've made enough trouble haven't they?

I really can't believe I heard this from a yank

Trilby · 08-16-2006, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayMcGee

I really can't believe I heard this from a yank

MsSparkie is Canadian.

Egg on your face much?

You're so busy hating us you don't even stop to read.

JayMcGee · 08-16-2006, 07:53 PM

touche....

But I don't hate you.... just your Govt's foreign policy.

and, tbh, your (as a nation) spelling irritates me a trifle....

Trilby · 08-16-2006, 07:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayMcGee

But I don't hate you....

Your hatred, along with a couple others here, is palpable.

tw · 08-16-2006, 07:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brianna

Your hatred, along with a couple others here, is palpable.

Where is the hate? This sounds more like the wife chastising the husband again. Anything to keep him in line.

DanaC · 08-16-2006, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Your hatred, along with a couple others here, is palpable.

That's a touch harsh. Do you hate Arabs? You are certainly very vocal about the elements of their culture that you dislike/disagree with etc.

Trilby · 08-16-2006, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tw

Where is the hate? This sounds more like the wife chastising the husband again. Anything to keep him in line.

tw, you aren't a sexist pig are you?

Trilby · 08-16-2006, 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DanaC

That's a touch harsh. Do you hate Arabs? You are certainly very vocal about the elements of their culture that you dislike/disagree with etc.

Not a touch harsh. Not harsh at all. You just can't be honest. You practically cheer for our demise.

JayMcGee · 08-16-2006, 08:16 PM

Brianna, as a person I barely know you, let alone know you well enough to hate you.

I certainly dislike the attitudes you espouse on this forum, in the sense that they are not the morals that I live my life by. But that does not make me hate you as a person.

Nor do I hate americans as a race, though I do feel that they are akin to benefit fraudsers by refusing to pay the tea tax.

DanaC · 08-16-2006, 08:36 PM

Quote:

Not a touch harsh. Not harsh at all. You just can't be honest. You practically cheer for our demise.

In a thread which showed a dead arab child, you made flippant comments about their 'drama loving-girl hating' culture. In any thread about the arab-israeli conflict you 'practically cheer for[their] demise'.

Do you hate arabs? Or do you disagree with aspects of their culture?

I am actually quite insulted that you would believe I hate you and would cheer for the demise of your country. You and I have shared PM conversations and i felt we'd got along well. That I am waaaaaay to the left of your political landscape and disagree vehemently with many of your cultural norms and political opinions does not negate the fact that I also admire much in your culture.

I won't apologise for the stance (sometimes deadly serious and sometimes tongue in cheek) I have taken on various topics, I will suggest however, that you try to take things less personally.

MaggieL and I have had some fairly heated arguments on these boards and she has made her feelings re: left wing, socialist, bleeding heart Brits fairly clear. That doesn't mean I think she hates me or us. (I could be wrong of course :PP)

tw · 08-16-2006, 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brianna

tw, you aren't a sexist pig are you?

Do you need one? Then yes. (is this where the fun starts?)

08-14-2006, 06:25 PM	#1
MsSparkie Curious Sagittarius Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 302	Terrorists Win? Hezbollah is now the rulers of Lebanon. Sharia is not far behind. Israel is being forced by the world to stop their defensive action against these terrorists. (Now why will the world not help in Darfur?) The Times August 14, 2006 Lebanon's 'real' soldiers are put in their place From Daniel McGrory in Beirut TODAY was supposed to be the day when the muchmaligned army of Lebanon took control of its borders and policed the UN ceasefire. Instead, its military commanders were left humiliated and its troops stranded as Hezbollah told them not to try to disarm its fighters. The first infantry units were preparing to head south yesterday when Hezbollah demonstrated who exercised the real control by announcing that it had no intention of surrendering a single weapon. General Michel Sleiman, the commander-in- chief of the Lebanese Army, and his lieutenants had been invited to join in Cabinet meetings to finalise plans to deploy their 15,000-strong force in a buffer zone south of the Litani river. However, they ended up being lectured by Hezbollah’s two Cabinet ministers in the coalition Government on what the army could and could not do. In Beirut, Western diplomats said that it raised serious concerns about the army’s ability and appetite to deal with Hezbollah. The Lebanese Government was left struggling to maintain a united front after unanimously backing the UN resolution on Saturday. Sami Haddad, the Economics Minister, said: “The Government can’t force Hezbollah to abide by the ceasefire. It’s unnatural to have an armed political party that is in Cabinet and does not abide by what the Government of Lebanon wants.” Nabih Berri, the Speaker of parliament and the Shia politician best placed to negotiate with Hezbollah, asked for 48 hours to broker a deal. Without Lebanese troops or the international force in place in the intended demilitarised zone, there is little serious prospect of the ceasefire holding for long. The stand-off came soon after Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, said on Hezbollah’s television network that his fighters would respect the ceasefire and described the deployment of Lebanese and foreign troops as “an honourable move”. He said that the deployment was “an achievement for Hezbollah and the Lebanon. It resulted from the steadfastness of the Lebanese people and the heroes of the resistance.” There were even optimistic murmurs about trying to integrate Hezbollah fighters into the army. But Hezbollah appear to have decided that the demand that it disarm and leave the 20km (12- mile) “arms-free zone” would have portrayed it as losers in the conflict. The army has lost 20 men, despite not firing a shot in anger. Two more soldiers were wounded yesterday near the Syrian border when an Israeli airstrike hit their 4x4. Elias Murr, the Defence Minister, said in the early days of the conflict: “We will defend our land until the last soldier, and we will pay any price for our land.” Yet troops retreated to their barracks or lounged on armoured vehicles in the shade in a token effort to police checkpoints in the capital or protect key buildings. President Lahoud admitted to a senior official last week: “If we had ordered our army to fight, they would have been wiped out.” Elias Hanna, a retired Lebanese army general, told The Times: “Sending 15,000 troops south is a political solution, not a military one. It’s more a PR stunt. The army needs the international force to help it. The key objective is to keep the army united, and not have it split on factional lines as it did in the civil war.” The force’s equipment is poor, and certainly no match for the Israelis, and it has neither an air force nor a navy. One soldier told The Times that Hezbollah was better armed and organised, adding that he was reluctant to confront what he called “the resistance fighters”. A colleague added: “We want to be able to go anywhere we want in Lebanon and be the only force inside our borders carrying guns. What we don’t know is when we will be able to do that.” Another said that his brother and a cousin were fighting for Hezbollah. His cousin was injured last week and moved to a Hezbollah clinic in a secret location. The soldier said: “I can't turn a gun on the resistance, because they are family.” __________________ ~There is a forest in an acorn......

08-14-2006, 08:58 PM	#2
richlevy King Of Wishful Thinking Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Philadelphia Suburbs Posts: 6,669	If the Lebanese army moved in without an international force, they would have been pounded on by Hezbollah and the Israelis. Hezbollah isn't going to disarm because they know that it won't stop Israel from trying to destroy them, so why even make the attempt. Even asking was pretty stupid, since the inevitable answer caused a loss of face for the army. It's too bad, since without the disarm request it might have been possible to set up the 12 mile DMZ. __________________ Exercise your rights and remember your obligations - VOTE! I have always believed that hope is that stubborn thing inside us that insists, despite all the evidence to the contrary, that something better awaits us so long as we have the courage to keep reaching, to keep working, to keep fighting. -- Barack Hussein Obama

08-14-2006, 09:33 PM	#3
MsSparkie Curious Sagittarius Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 302	By what right do they bear arms? The right of bullies and thugs? They need to disarm, weapon wise and hatred wise. They've made enough trouble haven't they? __________________ ~There is a forest in an acorn......

08-14-2006, 11:11 PM	#4
Urbane Guerrilla Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Southern California Posts: 6,674	Every event in Lebanon the past month has been helpful to Iran, and Iran only. The sooner Iran's antidemocracy (and thereby antihuman) mullahcracy goes... __________________ Wanna stop school shootings? End Gun-Free Zones, of course.

08-16-2006, 07:53 PM	#7
JayMcGee Cardigan-wearing man Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Much Binding In The Marsh Posts: 1,082	touche.... But I don't hate you.... just your Govt's foreign policy. and, tbh, your (as a nation) spelling irritates me a trifle.... __________________ I like wearing cardigans...... my current favourite is an orange cable-knit with real leatherette buttons.

08-16-2006, 08:16 PM	#13
JayMcGee Cardigan-wearing man Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Much Binding In The Marsh Posts: 1,082	Brianna, as a person I barely know you, let alone know you well enough to hate you. I certainly dislike the attitudes you espouse on this forum, in the sense that they are not the morals that I live my life by. But that does not make me hate you as a person. Nor do I hate americans as a race, though I do feel that they are akin to benefit fraudsers by refusing to pay the tea tax. __________________ I like wearing cardigans...... my current favourite is an orange cable-knit with real leatherette buttons.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)