Families of abducted soldiers 'disappointed' by UN resolution

[Behind the Aegis]

The families of two Israel Defense Forces soldiers kidnapped by Hezbollah guerillas met with Prime Minister Ehud Olmert on Sunday and expressed their "grave disappointment" over a new UN resolution calling for a "cessation of hostilities" in Lebanon.

Olmert updated the parents on the UN resolution and on the steps the government is taking to release the three abducted soldiers, which includes IDF soldier Gilad Shalit, captured on the Gaza-Israel border.

The prime minister said that Israel is doing its utmost to bring about the release of Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev, who were kidnapped by Hezbollah on July 12 on Israel's northern border.

Regev's brother Benny said the meeting with the prime minister did not help to set his mind at ease. "Tomorrow morning, or a few days from now, all of the IDF troops will leave Lebanon. The only ones who will be left alone, unarmed, with no helmet, are my brother and Udi," Regev said.


more...

[Tom Joad]

1. Maybe they should be demanding the release of all prisoners.

Including the ones held by Israel. Their families also wait for their return.

[Behind the Aegis]

2. not all prisioners should be released. n/t

[Violet_Crumble]

3. Yes, you've already said that Palestinian women and children shouldn't be.

n/t

[Behind the Aegis]

4. I said this where?

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Behind the Aegis]

13. Got link?

You have a link where barb162 says they shouldn't release Palestinian women and children?

As for the swap, the PA was not interested because they wanted all the women and children, including those found guilty of crimes; it was that demand that Israel refused.

[Violet_Crumble]

27. Yep, I do...

But you can go find it yrself. And I'll revise my earlier comment that you did support the release of women and children. 'Those found guilty of crimes'? What crimes, bta? A kid throwing a stone at a soldier??

[Behind the Aegis]

29. I see.

You make an accusation. When challenged, you backpedal and back-handily apologize, then accuse another DU'er of the same thing, all the while, revising what you claimed I said one more time all from some thread you say you have seen then tell me to go find with no parameters for the search. Interesting.

"What crimes, bta? A kid throwing a stone at a soldier??" I am sure there are a variety, everything from "white-collar" on up to more serious things, such as trying to blow something up and failing and getting nabbed. You don't think throwing a stone at a solider is a crime, vc? I don't about Australia, but in the States it is called assault and battery...a crime.

[Violet_Crumble]

30. No, you don't...

Maybe if someone had asked me who didn't have a long history of refusing to supply links to support what they claim, I'd have wasted some time going back and refinding it. But as it is you've sat here and said that you were opposed to Palestinian women and children being released in a prisoner swap, so the whole thing seems rather moot...

Reasonable folk draw a line and that's when it comes to releasing anyone with blood on their hands. fyi, that doesn't include kids who throw stones. As you haven't been able to supply specific examples of particular women or children with blood on their hands, nor did the Israeli govt turn around and say to the Palestinians that they'd be willing to release anyone but those with blood on their hands....

[Behind the Aegis]

31. Sure. Whatever.

You have it or you don't. I am guessing you don't. So, no need to discuss your "accusations" any further.

Oh...and so they have to "kill*" for it to be a crime? Interesting. You make a non-convincing strawman with your "blood ont he hands" argument.

On edit: *Or have caused injury that included blood.

[Violet_Crumble]

35. I have it. You don't..

Deal with it or go and search for it yrself...

btw, the *blood on their hands* argument isn't mine - it's a term used by the Israeli govt among many other folk, so if you have an issue with it, go and complain to them about it...

[Behind the Aegis]

26. well?

[Igel]

9. Well, of course. Free Kuntar.

Perhaps you have a 4-year-old girl?

But then, she wouldn't be Jewish (or Israeli, if we want to draw a distinction for the sake of Westerners), so she'd be safe.

I know I'm going to raise my son to emulate Kuntar, the hero of the righteous ummah everywhere, a true peace-seeker. The valiant kiddie-killer that Allah needs to defend Islam, making all Muslim men proud.

Ptooey.

[Sherman A1]

5. I imagine that they are dissappointed

with the results of the actions of the recent weeks. I thought one of the reasons for all this was to get their guys back and yet it seems that mission was not accomplished? I expect that Mr. Olmert will need to be answering a great deal of questions in the next few weeks.

[bowens43]

6. Captured soldiers, not abducted.

Damn , I hate the neo-con spin.

Think how disappointed the families of the hundreds of Lebanese murdered by the Israeli death machine amust be.

[Behind the Aegis]

7. They were abducted.

ab·duct ( P ) Pronunciation Key (b-dkt)
tr.v. ab·duct·ed, ab·duct·ing, ab·ducts
To carry off by force; kidnap.

"Captured" can be considered a synonym. However, since they (Hizb'allah) crossed the border and "carried off by force" two soldiers, I think "abducted" works.

As for you hyperbole....:eyes:

[MrPrax]

12. Sure...

Reduced to semantics, huh?

Yeah Israel will STILL have to ASK Hezbollah to release the abducted prisoners...none the less. ;-)

[sabbat hunter]

10. not neo-con spin

hizbollah is an illegal terror group. they have no rights to capture soliders, especially since they invaded israel to do so. what right do they have?

i wouldnt be surprised to find out that the soldiers are dead already.

[newyorican]

11. Were these soldiers at Shebba Farms?

From what I read they were in Israel or occupied territory or in Lebanon proper, depending on the source you choose to believe.

Not that it matters much to me, but it is confusing.

[Behind the Aegis]

14. No.

They were in Northeastern Israel, not Northwestern Israel, where the Shabaa Farms are located.

[sabbat hunter]

15. shebba farms

is not lebanese territory.

[newyorican]

17. Thanks for that..

..but that's not what I was asking.

While your assertion is debatable, the fact that Shebba farms is not in Israel, is not.

[IndianaGreen]

18. Everyone agrees that Shebaa Farms do not belong to Israel

they may belong to Lebanon or to Syria, but definitely they do not belong to Israel.

And neither does the Golan, Gaza, West Bank, and East Jerusalem belong to Israel. Israel must return to the pre-June 1967 borders. While this can be a basis for a lasting peace, particularly if Sharon's Separation Wall is moved and placed on the Green Line, we all know that there are some Arabs will never be happy until there are no more Jews in that region, just as there some Jews who won't be satisfied until they get their "Greater Israel." The task for the peacemakers is to deny the extremists in both sides what they want by turning back the clock to 1967, and compensate those that lost property in 1948, but no right of return.

[newyorican]

19. Not everyone...

In 1981, the area was officially annexed by Israel, as part of the Golan Heights.<13> This unilateral annexation is not recognised by the UN or international community.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shebaa_Farms (not the source I prefer, but I'm feeling lazy)

[IndianaGreen]

20. Israel has no more right to Golan than Saddam did to Kuwait

and let's face it, as long as an inch of land taken in 1967 remains in Israelis hands, we won't have a chance for peace. The day may come when Israel won't even get a choice to retreat behind the old 1967 borders. Simply put, the United States will withdraw from the Middle East and enter a long period of isolationism as a direct result of fatigue from the many wars that we endured during the Bush regime.

Better to make peace now, than later!

[msmcghee]

24. " . . just as there some Jews who won't be satisfied until . .

. . they get their greater Israel".

This statement reveals a mind distorted with hatered of Jews - or a really bad ability to observe reality - take your pick.

The difference is that Israel has never taken territory by military force when Israel was not attacked first. The territory kept was conquered in war started by Arab states and terrorist groups out to destroy Israel. Most has been given back in futile "land for peace" gestures. The rest has been returned or is scheduled for return as soon as peaceful borders can be assured.

There has never been an attempt to "get their greater Israel". Ever. It is only in the minds of Israel-haters who make these things up as justification for targeted killing of Israeli citizens that has been going on now for almost 60 years.

Name one time when Israel has attacked its neighbors when there wasn't a clear justification for doing so. You can not because Israel has constantly been threatened by Palestinians and every other Arab neighbor. All land outside the original UN mandated boundaries was taken in wars of destruction against Israel started by her enemies in attempts to destory the state of Israel.

Israel has never threatened her neighbors except in defence of her borders and citizens.

Or, reversing the challenge - name one time when any of Israel's neighbors were attacked by Israel when they were clearly minding their own business and not threatening Israel. Another impossible task because it never happened.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Andromeda]

22. They weren't captured; they were abducted.

They were inside the Israeli border when they were taken. I really hate the neo-loony-left spin.

Hezbollah did their share of killing too, only they weren't aiming at military targets. They just fired rockets at random at civilian populations to intentionally kill non-combatants.

[IndianaGreen]

16. Ehud Wasserman and his colleagues should be home now!

No matter how one feels about this war, and my views about it are well known, it is imperative that these soldiers are returned to their families immediately and unconditionally. I cannot conceive of any government, much less the State of Israel, failing to secure the return of its POWs.

Ideally there should be a prisoner swap following negotiations between the parties, but in regards to the IDF soldiers who were victims of an unprovoked attack, they should be released at once!

[Andromeda]

21. I don't understand that either.

Why weren't the release of the kidnapped soldiers part of the agreement?

I have to question the common sense of that resolution.

[IndianaGreen]

23. Perhaps because their release was not the real reason for the war

and Sy Hersh has been right all along, Israel and the US planned for an Israeli attack on Hizbollah in order to facilitate an American war on Iran.

Israel's alliance with American neocons will be her downfall!

[Behind the Aegis]

32. And maybe the Earth is flat...

...everybody has a "theory."

[IndianaGreen]

33. I don't recall Olmert demanding their release

all he did was babble the neocon line about Hezbollah and Iran.

Do you hear Olmert calling for their release even today?

[Behind the Aegis]

34. He did from the VERY beginning!

He demanded their release and the Hizb'allah be pulled away from the Israeli border to the north! I didn't hear any speeches from him today.

[malaise]

28. Any word from the families

of Lebanese and Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails?