Hezbollah Targets Civilians, Israel Targets Combatants.

[Warren Stupidity]

Another Modern Myth.

In the bitter flame war here on DU we have heard over and over that Hezbollah targets civilians while the IDF does not. Hezbollah's victims are deliberate, the IDF's victims are unfortunate collateral damage, a tragic but inevitable consequence of war.

This is held to be an indisputable truism in the Good Guys vs Bad Guys Manichean Struggle that our propaganda masters feed us through the media machine. If this proposition is true, then when we examine the civilian vs combatant death toll on each side it should be the case that Hezbollah's victims are overwhelmingly civilian while Israel's victims are overwhelmingly combatants.

I give you, as a data point: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/world/interactives/mideastattacks/israelmap.html

I further assert that the Washington Post's bias is quite frankly pro-Israel. Please note the table in the lower right quadrant of the map. Lebanon has suffered 294 fatalities, 267 of which were civilian. Civilians account for 90% of the death total inflicted by the IDF. Israel has suffered 29 fatalities of which 15 were civilian. Civilians account for 52% of the death total inflicted by Hezbollah.

These are uncomfortable facts. Now these facts alone do not prove that the IDF is targeting civilians, nor do they prove that Hezbollah is not targeting civilians, but they do distinctly call into question the validity of the assertion that Hezbollah targets civilians while Israel does not. The facts do not sustain that assumption.

A more reasonable view would be that both Hezbollah and Israel are conducting terror campaigns against the civilian populations of Israel and Lebanon.

[adwon]

1. Just a question

How is civilian defined by the Post? Is it non-military? Non-military, non-Hezbollah? Just curious.

Read nothing into my question, please. I'm keeping my dog out of this fight. :P

[Warren Stupidity]

2. According to the interactive map...

"Deaths in Israel and Lebanon are taken from staff and wire reports since fighting began July 12; conflicting reports make casualty counts difficult to estimate."

There is no doubt that there is a large error factor in the numbers, however The Post is using their own sources and not Israeli or Lebanese government reports. Even with uncertainty, the overall pattern is clear, at least to me: both sides are conducting a war of terror against civilian populations.

[electropop]

44. Israel's killing civilians at their usual 10:1 ratio versus their enemies.

That's been the ratio with Palestinians for many years (10 Palestinian civilians killed per Israeli civilian), and now they're holding to it in Lebanon (last I heard, 34 Israelis, 330 Lebanese).

So that means Israel's winning, right? :sarcasm:

[Leopolds Ghost]

59. Didn't Reagan once cite the 10:1 Ratio as Biblically-motivated?

I have specifically seen numerous editorials in the Washington Post by Israeli opinion-makers and even rabbis specifically stating:

"We don't believe in this namby-pamby turn-the-other-cheek bullshit Americans read in their New Testament. In our fath, it's kill or be killed, and if you have to kill two enemies for every Israeli, then it is right to do so. The only reason Leviticus is not fully operative today is changed circumstances, not change in the nature of right and wrong."

And the scary thing is that Right Wing Evangelicals want to corrupt their own faith to correspond with the Old Testament Reconstructionism that has drowned out liberal Jewish voices in Israel...

a country where Reform Judaism (descended from Hillel, a contemporary of Jesus) is not even a recognized faith.

[cali]

3. Agreed and

even if Israel is not targeting civilians, they have a callous disregard that is no better than intent.

[TahitiNut]

57. Well, the solution is clear.

We need to supply Hexbollah with rockets and armaments that are equally accurate as those possessed by the Israelis.

After all, since it's a question of intention and accuracy, we can't reasonably induce intention without making the accuracy equal, right?

(It's really funny that, even with the more wildly inaccurate rockets, the proportional death toll indicates the opposite. Gee. Go figure. It's also funny that it's conveniently ignored.)

[BringEmOn]

72. What's Ollie North up to nowadays?

I'm sure the Crime Family is making out both ways.

[Warren Stupidity]

80. I was thinking a more general solution

would be for the ** maladministration to use its purse strings to demand that Israel sit down and negotiate an unconditional bilateral cease fire and exchange of prisoners with both Hamas and Hezbollah and then get serious about using that as a starting point for a fair and just settlement of the entire palestinian problem, but I realize that this is a fantasy and that your suggestion is probably more realistic.

[Igel]

4. We'll never be able to produce a remotely accurate

civilian:combatant kill ratio.

We don't know what's happening in the south, we can't identify Hezbollah when they're dead. We know the civilian death count because that's what the reporters are told; we don't know the Hezbollah count. The deaths would occur in areas that support Hezbollah, or in areas where Hezbollah's all but imposes a news blackout.

They wouldn't say they had heavy losses if they did; they wouldn't say they had heavy losses if they didn't. They can't say they've had no losses; that's palpably false. So they've said they have light losses. What inference can we make?

But this levels another charge at Hezbollah--that they're waging a media war as well (in fact, when Nasrallah said they weren't hit, he took pains to point out that that fact wasn't part of "psyops war", I think his translator's phrase was). It also means that the media would have to acknowledge they know less than they want to be seen as knowing.

[NoodleyAppendage]

5. Hezbollah leaders publicly apologize for killing children. Israel?

Maybe it was a shrewd PR move, but Hezbollah's leader apologizing for the death of those two Israeli children the other day was encouraging. I wish I could say the same type of apology was made by Olmert over their killing of dozens of Lebanese children. Maybe I'm wrong...has Israel apologized for killing children???

J

[cali]

14. Encouraging?

Surely you jest. It was stunningly cynical. Hell, it was grotesque. He apologized because they were Arab Israelis, and went on to laud them as martyrs. How the fuck do you think their parents feel? And he sure has a good chance of killing his fellow arabs, as he's lobbing rockets into areas where Arab Israelis are concentrated. Had those rockets killed Jewish children, he would have been rejoicing.

I found your remark naive to the point of absurdity.

[NoodleyAppendage]

20. Thanks for not answering my question. Has Israel apologized for any kids?

Again...has Israel made ANY SORT OF STATEMENT OF REGRET OR APOLOGY for killing children...regardless of what type or nationality? Any statement of remorse?

Please provide. Otherwise, step off jack.

J

[cali]

23. Israel has

made the same meaningless and bland statements they always do, a general we're sorry that civilians have been killed as we nobly pursue terrorists blanket statement, that absolves them of nothing.

Both attitudes are sick.

[oberliner]

24. Israel apologizes for deaths of 8 in Lebanon

Israel apologizes for deaths of 8 in Lebanon

Israel apologized Wednesday for the raid in Lebanon that killed eight members of a Montreal man's family, and Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay has called the man to express his sorrow over the tragedy.

Israel's prime minister called Prime Minister Stephen Harper to offer his condolences and the consul general for Israel in Montreal, Marc Attali, issued a public statement.

"Israel expresses sadness and deep sorrow for the deaths of eight Canadian citizens, and personally, I also extend my sympathy to the family of the victims," he said.

Source: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/story/2006/07/19/israel-apology.html

[NoodleyAppendage]

25. Thank you. Well, at least that's a positive step...though it was CAN citi

I suspect this apology was more aligned with trying to head off an international incident with Canada - a major trading partner with Israel. But, that being said, it is encouraging.

I think some goodwill might be generated if Israel takes the "high ground" PR-wise and apologizes for ALL innocent Lebanese deaths. Doing so would not be a sign of weakness and would allow Israel to reform some of its tarnish reputation following the infrastructure bombing of Lebanon.

J

[High Plains]

28. They were Canadian citizens. That makes them worthy of regret.

For political reasons.

[Spazito]

67. Ahhh, so Canadian citizens are of more concern than Lebanese

citizens? Oh, and it was not an apology, when you read what Olmert actually said, he merely offered condolences and sympathy to the family.

An apology should have been extended but, if one was to be given, it should be for all the deaths of innocents.

The same goes for the "apology" by the leader of Hezbollah, it should have been for the death of ALL innocents not just for the death of two Arab Israelis.

[Imagevision]

73. And while the world is pre-occupied with Israel/lebanon Iraq civil war

continues to go thru the roof.

[helpman]

66. Is Israel Using Arab Villages as Human Shields?

Notes from northern Israel

Is Israel Using Arab Villages as Human Shields?

By JONATHAN COOK


Nazareth hit the international headlines for the first time in this vicious war being waged by Israel mostly on Lebanese civilians. Reporter Matthew Price, corseted in a blue flak jacket in Haifa, told BBC viewers that for the first time Hizbullah had targeted Nazareth late on Sunday. “Nazareth is a mostly Christian town”, he added, managing to cram into a single sentence of a few words two factual mistakes and a disturbing hint of incitement.

Whatever the precision of its rockets (and Nazareth’s residents are certainly worried enough about that), Hizbullah struck not at Nazareth but at a site some distance from Nazareth -- a site of strategic significance to Israel, though I cannot say more than that as we are now officially under martial law in the country’s north.

Matthew Price was also wrong about Nazareth being a “mostly Christian town”. During the 1948 war in which Israel’s army ethnically cleansed much of the surrounding area of Palestinians, Muslim villagers fled to Nazareth in search of sanctuary. Today, two-thirds of the city’s 75,000 inhabitants are Muslim -- or at least they are by the religious classification system imposed on all citizens by the Israeli authorities.

Which brings us to the nasty element of incitement from our BBC reporter.

SNIP

http://www.counterpunch.org/Cook07192006.html

[Warren DeMontague]

38. "Shrewd PR?" He apologized because they WEREN'T JEWS.

If they'd been wearing yarmulkes when they got blown up, it would have been hunky dory.

Good grief.

You want to know who Hezbollah is? Here's your answer:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=1669305

[oberliner]

6. Critical Omission

This conclusion omits the fact that Hezbollah hides their military installations in civilian areas thereby using civilians as human shields.

[Warren Stupidity]

8. Rationalize away the facts. Sleep well. Reality sucks. nt.

[oberliner]

12. Nancy Pelosi Statement

"As the fighting rages, it is imperative that the combatants take whatever steps they can to lessen risk to innocent civilians. The world knows too well the horrors of war. It also knows that there are ways to offer some degree of protection to civilians, and it is right to insist that those ways be chosen. Using civilians as shields by concealing weapons in civilian areas, as done by Hezbollah, is inconsistent with affording them protection, and the resolution we are considering properly condemns that action. Protecting civilians also means getting our citizens out of harm's way as quickly as possible. I urge the administration to expedite its efforts to bring to safety those Americans who want to leave Lebanon.

Pelosi Floor Statement on House Resolution Reaffirming Support for Israel
7/19/2006 10:38:00 PM

Source: http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=69505

[Warren Stupidity]

16. Yes the rationalizing goes right up to the top.

Sleep well. Hold all those comfort thoughts tightly.

[oberliner]

19. John Conyers Statement

None of us condone terrorism in any way, shape, or form, and I believe Hezbollah is a terrorist organization that was, is, and remains a threat to peace in the Mideast, and must be dismantled and disarmed.

July 19, 2006, Congressman John Conyers

[Warren Stupidity]

29. The delusional thinking is wide spread.

How does Mr Conyers propose dismantling Hezbollah, the militia that represents the majority shiite population of Lebanon, when Israel's attempts to do just that for its disastrous occupation of southern Lebanon were a total failure? One obvious way would be to exterminate enough of the Shiite population to force them to submit to our authority. I suggest that this is pretty much the course Israel is pursuing and it is abhorent to civilized people.

You can trot out any number of Democrats who I otherwise agree with who have signed on to murdering civilians as an appropriate course of action, and it will not deter me from continuing to believe that such actions constitute terrorism and are the actions of a terrorist organization.

[Crunchy Frog]

101. Article about IDF use of civilians as human shields.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4333982.stm

[sofa king]

7. No, these civillian deaths are ALL Hezbollah's doing.

This is a civil war (Hezbollah, a political party in addition to a terrorist outfit, in rebellion against the Lebanese government) inside of a proxy war (Hezbollah as the attack-dog of Iran and Syria) inside of a common border dispute (Lebanon cannot control its own borders well enough to prevent Hezbollah's raids into Israel). It's way more complicated than just an Israeli war against Lebanon or the Lebanese people.

By allowing the attacks in the first place, Lebanon has demonstrated a fatal weakness which guarantees that in addition to its new civil war, it will be invaded by someone. The only question is who is going to invade them first. Lebanon is its own best historical example of this unfortunate reality. See the 1958 Crisis as an example of a weak Lebanese government being propped up by an American invasion, the Syrian intervention of 1976 (which was paradoxically against the Palestinians, in favor of Maronite Christians, and on the same side as Israel), and the two previous Israeli occupations, both of which were in response to precisely the same sorts of raids which are happening now.

It doesn't seem to matter which group of assholes in Southern Lebanon is causing the trouble, they all do the same thing. They raid Israel and conceal their infrastructure and defenses among the civilian population in Southern Lebanon. The reason for this is simple, but easy to forget or never see: every time Israel strikes back at the insurgents in Southern Lebanon, civilians are killed to massive public outcry, making Israel's response all the more difficult.

Thus, Hezbollah deserves credit not just for starting this latest conflict, not just for killing Israeli civilians, but also for the deaths of the Lebanese civilians in Southern Lebanon. The deaths of Lebanese civilians are part of Hezbollah's plan, a classic fork of asymetric warfare. Hezbollah chose to involve those civilians; Hezbollah chose to hide amongst those civilians, and Hezbollah is counting on the fact that you won't put two and two together.

Note that I didn't say that Israel is blameless. Rather, Hezbollah is counting on Israel to act aggressively and, they hope, indiscriminately. Israel will; they always do. But the distinction must be made between who is planning on having those civilians killed and the goon who actually does it.

[Warren Stupidity]

9. Most of the civilian casulties are in Beirut.

If targeting civilians makes Hezbollah a terrorist organization, then the IDF is also a terrorist organization. It is that simple. Pick your standard, but apply it to both sides. The cross border raid was a military operation against a military target. Civilians started to be targeted here, in this blow up, by both sides, when the IDF starting bombing the crap out of Lebanon, killing civilians, either deliberately or with total disregard for the consequences of their target selection.

[sofa king]

17. I still disagree.

Beirut of course houses the legitimate political offices of Hezbollah and are obvious targets in this conflict.

Sometimes I think people understand the world of Star Wars better than the world around us. So let me try a Star Wars analogy.

Let's say that you're a droid with great compassion for other droids. You are particularly concerned about the deactivation of countless droids on the planet Naboo as depicted in The Phantom Menace. Who, you want to know, is responsible for destroying the droids on Naboo?

Your first and most obvious suspect is Jar Jar Binks, because he was the general in the field and because everyone hates Jar Jar. It's easy to blame him.

But it was Darth Sidious who planned the war in the first place and maneuvered the circumstances to make it happen. Darth Sidious' callous plan depended on the destruction of the droids, in order to achieve a larger strategic goal.

Jar Jar might have accidentally destroyed some droids while providing annoying comic relief, but all of the droid destruction falls under the subset of Darth Sidious' plan.

Do you see how these two things are not morally equivalent at all? How one evil is orders of magnitude greater than the other? How adding up the droid deaths in Jar Jar's column will never, ever equal the totality of Darth Sidious', because one is a subset of the other? The standard cannot be applied to both sides equally because one side is responsible for all of the destruction.

Applying the standard to both sides "equally" is not only unfair to one side, it's part of the other side's evil plan. By buying into that false moral equivalency, you are actually facilitating the agenda of the most guilty party.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

10. Why haven't Israel and the U.S. fought a proxy war?

If Hezbollah is the proxy of Syria and Iran, then why haven't the Israelis and the U.S. armed, equipped, and trained the Lebanese Army to fight Hezbollah and throw them out of Lebanon? Why haven't they given a modern air force and high tech weapons to the Lebanese Army? Why haven't they fought a proxy war using the Lebanese? It's truly a shame that just when Lebanon seems to be getting on its feet as a democracy, their entire society is being destroyed.

Is it that neither the U.S. nor Israel trust Lebanon? Is it that they don't want a strong, prosperous, and militarily sophisticated Arab state? Wouldn't it have been better for Israel to have limited its response and to have engaged in prisoner exchange over the two captured Israeli soldiers and instead partnered with the Lebanese government and their military to let them eject Hezbollah themselves? According to Bush, Lebanon was the good guy.

[Warren Stupidity]

11. Israel tried that initially in south Lebanon

during the brutal Lebanese civil war. The SLA was a notoriously brutal organization. It was pretty much wiped out during the collapse of the Israeli occupation of south Lebanon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Lebanon_Army

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

13. I'm not talking about an Israeli occupation - in fact the very opposite

I'm talking about a proxy war, the same way people are saying Hezbollah is a proxy of Iran and Syria. I'm not talking about arming and equipping factions within Lebanon but instead the regular army, under the direction of the democratically elected President.

I'm suggesting that Israel and the United States have fully trained and equipped a modern Lebanese Army to the hilt and to have let them take care of Hezbollah. Apparently, things are not the same in Lebanon now as they were before during the previous war, with their democratically elected government. Turning Lebanon into a powerful, militarily sophisticated Arab state might have helped their democracy to survive.

I'm suggesting that Israel and the United States should perhaps have kept its response to the captured soldiers very, very restrained and instead have worked over a slow but steady period of time to nurture the civil society, government, and military of Lebanon. This would have been the better option. What this latest reaction by Israel suggests to me is that they don't want a strong democracy with a powerful military in Lebanon.

[Warren Stupidity]

15. Read the link. SLA pre-existed the occupation.

Part of the rational for the original invasion of south Lebanon was to prop up the failing SLA.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

18. I did read it - and again I'm not talking about an occupation

I'm NOT talking about singling out a right wing faction in Lebanon and beefing it up. I'm suggesting that the U.S. have built up the central, democratically-elected government of Lebanon the way they built up Israel, over a slow and measured period of time. Instead of a single faction within Lebanon that requires the presence of an occupying force to prop it up, I'm suggesting that the independent, democratic government of Lebanon have been slowly strengthened over time, economically and militarily. It would not necessarily be the lap dog of Israel or the United States. But presumably, democracies are peaceful according to Bush. Let the Lebanese take care of their own internal affairs and give their own army the ability to control the country according to the wishes of the people and the democratically elected President of Lebanon. Give them the feeling that their democracy is worth fighting for and preserving.

The quick fix that Israel is trying to impose will backfire.

[Warren Stupidity]

26. You don't understand Lebanon.

I'm not an expert, but a statement like "the central, democratically-elected government of Lebanon" indicates a lack of appreciation for the governmental system Lebanon has, the role of militias in the real power structures of Lebanon, and the history of Lebanon over the last 30 years or so. Simplistically, the central government of Lebanon is a fiction, a facade over the ethnic militias that run the country. By far the dominant militia is Hezbollah. As for 'democratically elected', that is a bit of a farce too as the arrangement that the French imposed on Lebanon as they left keeps the nominal central government dominated by the minority Christian ethnic groups, effectively keeping the shiite majority out of power and fueling the de facto role of Hezbollah as the dominant power in Lebanon.

At any rate, my point is that Israel attempted the proxy army solution from 76 until its invasion and occupation of southern Lebanon un 82. The proxy army failed. The occupation failed. What Israel thinks it is going to accomplish now, other than widen the war into a general regional conflict, is a very good question.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

41. What I do understand is that 1.5 million Lebanese demonstrated

in the streets in favor of democracy and in a direct call for the end of the militias. I think we should be encouraging that and if we had a President with a vision, he would have reined in Israel and tried to continue the slow and steady momentum for unity and democracy in Lebanon. That would involve both economic and military support of the government over a long period of time. While Lebanon may not yet have a strong central government able to take on the militias including Hezbollah, that's not to say that one day it won't have one. It won't be a quick fix, however. But then all Bush knows is the quick fix, like the one he tried to engineer in Iraq through war and occupation, to our current despair.

[Warren Stupidity]

43. And the next week 1.5 million Lebanese demonstrated

in the streets of Beirut in support of Hezbollah. That is Lebanon in a nutshell.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

48. I just heard a Lebanese expert on TV who said is was 300,000

one-fifth the number who supported democracy. I think the momentum was there to be seized by Bush, but, as usual, he had a failure of vision.

[malaise]

21. Your post is too rational

they won't arm Lebanon because then Israel can't grab any more land.

[Chulanowa]

58. No, it's because that would lead to a stable Arab state

that is comitted to and able to fight terrorism.

So long as Arab states remain unstable, they remain powerless, pliable to western exploitation.
So long as they cannot fight terrorists on their own soil, that gives western powers the "authority" to fight those terrorists "for" them.

It is not in the best interest of Israeli nor American politicans to have a stable and capable middle eastern state. While the populations of both nations clamour for such stability, the people they elect keep things fucked up.

[cracksquirrel]

22. Alright...

"A more reasonable view would be that both Hezbollah and Israel are conducting terror campaigns against the civilian populations of Israel and Lebanon."

See, that's where you lost me, on the MORE reasonable bit...

[Warren Stupidity]

27. So make your case.

How would you account for the vastly dispropostionate civilian deaths caused by the IDF? Do you ascribe to the 'human shield' explanation?

[cracksquirrel]

30. well...

The human shield thing is a part of it. But the fact of the matter is, the IDF is just BETTER at blowing things up than Hezb'allah is, if just because of superior hardware. If Hezb'allah had the kind of weapons the IDF had, there wouldn't BE a Haifa anymore, it would just be a smoldering crater full of dead Jews, which is prettymuch Hezb'allah's goal anyways.
I understand wanting to look at this in a balanced way, and to try and form the kind of nuanced opinion that we on the periphery of all this bloodshed have the luxury of forming. However, try as I might, I just can't find moral equivalence between what Israel is doing and what Hezb'allah is doing. I only wish there was a BETTER, less costly way for the IDF/IAF to defend Israeli civilians than inflicting tremendous amounts of pain and suffering on Lebanese civilians. I'm not cheerleading for Israel, I'm just frustrated because I know that Israel needs to do SOMETHING to defend itself, I just can't think of anything that isn't unacceptable in my moral standards... This conflict is so soul-stifling because it just sucks the morality and the humanity out of both sides, and the longer it goes (60 years running now), the worse the effect on the psyches of the people involved and interested parties.
My ideal solution would be a four or five generation time-out, a cooling off period between all sides. However, the technology just doesn't exist right now to make some sort of plasma field shield dome over Israel so that they can be sure that their civilians will be safe from harm.
No matter what side you may be on, or if you even take a side; the frustration is unbearable.

[Warren Stupidity]

31. No Israeli civilians were killed until Israel started bombing.

Israel's actions did not defend their civilian population, it exposed them to counterattack by Hezbollah. The border incident that precipitated the Israeli attack was a military operation against a military target. Israel responded with widespread bombardment of civilian targets across Lebanon and Hezbollah responded in kind with rocket attacks on civilian targets in Israel. I agree that of course the IDF has vastly superior firepower, however they have used that firepower to terrorize the Lebanese population and that, all by itself, is a war crime. Hezbollah's actions are also war crimes, neither side is justified when it attacks civilians. That is my point here: both Hezbollah and the IDF are guilty of war crimes by attacking civilians, both are acting as terrorist organizations.

[cracksquirrel]

32. No point arguing here

But Hezbollah's been chucking rockets over the border for years, just not in the kind of flurry as of late.

[Warren Stupidity]

39. Not really.

"But Hezbollah's been chucking rockets over the border for years, just not in the kind of flurry as of late."

This assertion has been made repeatedly and I do not believe it is true. Since the 2000 withdrawal I believe there was one Hezbollah rocket attack, on Kiryat Shmona. But I could be wrong. Please document the other rocket attacks by Hezbollah on civilian targets since 2000.

[eridani]

54. Actually, that stopped when Israel withdrew from Lebanon in 2000

In fact, civilians in northern Israel are now complaining that they negelected to maintain their bomb shelters because they fell into disuse after 2000. (This factoid buried in one of the many posts on the subject here.)

[cracksquirrel]

56. Good to know

There's been so much violence there the last six years, it's all blurred together... I just want it to stop...
*pleading*

[samhsarah]

64. Do you think the civilian population of South Lebanon are terrified......

as the IDF blows their country to bits? Just wondering.

[NobleCynic]

33. I think you've got it pretty close here

Both sides commit horrible atrocities. Both sides are guilty of targeting civilians.

My take? The world would be better off without the extremists on both sides. I'd gladly be rid of Hezbollah and Likud if it could be done in one fell swoop. All they do is take a bad situation and make it worse.

[threadkillaz]

34. And when it comes to weapons..

The United States supplies or sells

while..

Iran gives or backs

Wars are fought more in the arena of public opinion than on the battlefield.

[The Magistrate]

35. Two Points, Sir

First, the category of "civilian" is a poor one in a conflict involving an iregular body operatring out of uniform. The proper distinction is between combatant and non-combatant. It is quite possible for a combatant to be a civilian in such circumstances, and reporting him as such, if he is killed, is one of those "well, it's not really a lie" sort of propaganda specialities.

Second, it is certainly a fact that Hezbollah does operate among a popularion of non-combatants. This is nothing special: all partisan irregular forces do this. The non-combatant population serves it as a species of cover, a sort of human foliage, and the non-combatant deaths that necessarily occur when partisans are so sheltered and attacked by their enemies make very useful propaganda and recruiting tools. It is a violation of the rules of war for combatants to install themselves, and conduct their operations, in situations where harm to non-combatants is certain to occur if they are engaged by their enemy.

[Rex]

36. I doubt it is that Hezbollah 'hides' among Lebanese

more likely it is family and friends that get bombed to death. I wonder the size of the populace that is Hezbollah or sympathetic to their cause. Some people here just won't admit that Hezbollah is part of the ruling party in Lebanon, but it is. Wanted or not, it is. How did Israel finally end up dealing with Arafat and Hamas?

[The Magistrate]

46. Hezbollah Is Quite Popular, Sir

It would seem that something between a third and two fifths of the Lebanese populace looks to them as the expression of their political will.

Friends and family of a militant, of course, are those most likely to be involved in directly assisting or shielding his activities, or present when these become a target for the enemy. Guerrilla war, and the suppression of guerrilla bodies, is a damned ghastly business.

[Rex]

50. Ghastly business...well said.

Then that means a large majority of Lebanon supports Hezbollah and that Israel will have to defeat them militarily in order to stop Hezbollah. Unless Hezbollah takes the first steps to peace, not holding by breath on that one.

[MaraJade]

84. I was watching some interviews of Lebanese men and

almost all of them were Hezbollah sympathizers.

This whole thing smacks of VietNam . . .The VietCong would pick sympathetic villages to bivowac in. Since they wore no uniforms it was impossible for anyone to tell them from the villagers. From these places, they would stage sniper and other attacks. Afterward, they would
simpley mingle with the "innocent" villagers.

This sort of guerilla tactic is being used not only by Hezbollah, but by
the insurgency in Iraq. After an attack, the guerillas simply merge with the locals and "disappear." But their disappearing act is not without help: some of the locals harbor them in their homes and places of business.

If a person allows a criminal to shoot at the neighbors from their upstairs window, don't the neighbors have a RIGHT to break down the door
in an effort to stop the shooter? The householder may complain that he did no such shooting himself, but he is an "accessory after the fact" due to his allowing the criminal to do the shooting. Both parties are
guilty. This is the case with the Hezbollah and their relationship with
the Lebanese. Hezbollah is clearly the aggessor, but Lebanon is the
"accessory after the fact" for providing a safe base from which attacks can be launched.

[Warren Stupidity]

37. As I said I used WAPO's definitions and estimates.

You would astound me by demonstrating that the Washington Post is anything but biased toward the Israeli position. The point isn't exactly what the numbers are, it is the general pattern, and about that there really cannot be any honest dispute. For example, are you disputing the Israeli casualty numbers and ratios?

Which brings me to your second point. I now have very little tolerance for the human shield talking point. It is the official propaganda. Even if true, which I reject, it does not provide an excuse for killing civilians. Hezbollah has military installations, they are just damned hard to knock out. Instead the IDF has taken the tack of terrorizing the Lebanese population in hopes of turning them against Hezbollah. As always this tactic, unless applied to the extreme, has the opposite effect. Many Israeli civilians are also IDF reservists. How is Hezbollah supposed to distinguish between a reservist living in an apartment building, and the 'real civilians' living in the same building? The human shield argument, not that it is being used by Hezbollah, could be used equivalently to falsely justify Hezbollah's war crimes. As I said, I reject the argument as dishonest.

[The Magistrate]

42. Clearly, Sir, We Take Different Views

There is, after all, no requirement we agree.

The newspaper gets its casualty reports from the Lebanese government, which is the origin for U.N. reports on the question as well. There is no independent means of examining their characterization of casualties, or of any close enquiry into their circumstances. Any government being necessarily staffed in the main by skilled and practiced liars, my custom is to reserve judgement on their statements of fact, particuklarly where a lie might be of bnenefit to them.

You may choose to view the normal practice of partisan and guerrilla operations as "propaganda", and so disregard it as a factor in the current hostilities in Lebanon, but it seems unsound to do so, to me. The Geneva Accords, by the way, state specifically that reservists not on active duty are non-combatants, and so that line can carry no weight at all. If there were to be, however, an incident in which, say, an Arab militant group knew that a Shin-Bet major always took his breakfast at a certain restaurant at eight A.M., and arranged to blow it up one morning as he sat down to his eggs, my view would be that the deaths any other diners unfortunate enough to be there at the time were no crime.

[Warren Stupidity]

47. Not true there.

"The newspaper gets its casualty reports from the Lebanese government" WAPO states as I posted earlier that it used its own reporters and other independent sources to generate reports for both sides.

As always in a guerilla war, the excuse for killing civilians is that this is the only way to kill the guerillas, that somehow it is the fault of the guerillas that civilians are being blown up. I have rejected this argument since I first came across it so many years ago in the 60's and I reject it now as nothing more than a transparent excuse for war crimes. Turning South Beirut into rubble is not justified by 'it is a Hezbollah hideout'. Blowing up civilian infrastructure is not flushing Hezbollah out from inside power stations, from under bridges, from sewage treatment plants. Israel is terrorizing Lebanon.

[The Magistrate]

51. The Phrase 'Staff And Wire Reports", Sir

Falls far short of indicating the reports do not derive from the statements of the Lebanese government.

[Warren Stupidity]

52. Nor does it prove your assertion that they came from the Leb. gov.

As I stated, the WAPO is strongly supporting this war. I'll go with their numbers. If you want to come up with some other numbers that are better sourced, be my guest.

[yodermon]

45. Question

Is it likewise a violation of the rules of war to bombard combatant positions while in the full knowledge that such positions are amidst and directly endanger non-combatants?

Or, does the recognition that the first party has embedded itself with the non-combatants and thus violated the rules of war, give sufficient moral cover for the 2nd party to proceed with impunity, and it's the first party's own fault for breaking the rules first?

[The Magistrate]

49. It May Or May Not Be, Ma'am

Two assessments must be made: does the direct military benefit gained outweigh the harm done to non-combatants, and has reasonable care been taken to minimize the harm done to non-combatants. These standards are necessarily subjective, and thus subject to debate and a broad range of opinion on whether or not they have been met. There is not a body of precedent in the question, formed by actual rulings of judges in particular cases, to serve as a guide to how these things should be read in practice. The various war crimes tribunals so far empanelled have mostly concerned themselves with charges relating to obvious violations, such as the murder of persons in custody of a military force, or the massacre of un-armed people in a situation where there was clearly no military presence at all, or the gross maltreatment of prisoners. It is quite possible, too, for an incident to have been criminal conduct by both parties, the one sheltering itself among non-combatants, and the other gaining no benefit by the engagement, or using obviously excessive force in it.

[nashville_brook]

62. category of "civilian" is a poor one.

it's too bad the evil-doers don't have uniforms.

is someone were to have a bake sale to buy the terrorists uniforms -- would that be a bad thing?

[Warren Stupidity]

63. As I said, these are the WAPOs numbers.

They are very much a pro Israeli newspaper. You can argue that the numbers are not quite right but at a 90% civilian kill ratio you are not going to convince me that the pattern is not clear.

[Snivi Yllom]

40. it's not a myth

Hezbollah is certainly indiscriminantly lobbing rockets towards cities. This is intentional targeting of civilians.

[Warren Stupidity]

61. Explain the numbers.

My post did not deny that Hezbollah is lobbing rockets at civilian targets. The myth is that Israel is not doing the same thing.

[Snivi Yllom]

68. you ignore 1 point, Hezbollah are Lebanese civilians

when you blur the lines, it's not Israel's fault if innocent civilian are killed.

[Warren Stupidity]

77. Sorry that theory was bullshit 40 years ago

and it is bullshit today. If I were as dishonest as those who have concocted the human shield rational for the Israeli terror campaign I could make the following equivalent argument.

Israeli military reservists are deliberately mingled with the Israeli civilian population. These reservists are on call 24/7 for activation and are being activated right now for the land invasion. Hezbollah cannot possibly determine if a residence contains civlians or Israeli combatants, if Israel chooses to blur the lines like this by surrounding its reservists with civilian human shields it is not Hezbollah's fault if civilians are killed.

The argument is stupid and dishonest. The argument from either side is stupid and dishonest. The argument is a pathetic excuse for those who commit war crimes. Take that defense to the ICC ans see how much weight it holds.

Both Israel and Hezbollah are deliberately targeting the civilian populations of Lebanon and Israel.

[sinogirl]

83. Yes Hizbollah are Children as well

... so I guess it's not Israels fault if children are killed as well...


Hizbollah mind you is also targeting children with it's rockets, without a doubt.... since they don't have a damn clue where the things land.

[furman]

53. Israel does not conduct terror campaigns

Warren Stupidity: A more reasonable view would be that both Hezbollah and Israel are conducting terror campaigns against the civilian populations of Israel and Lebanon.

Nonsense. Hezbollah bases themselves in populated civilian areas.
Israel is primarily targeting Hezbollah infrastructure.

Israel has been warning people to leave Southern Lebanon.

If Israel were to intentionally target Lebanese civilians, the death toll would be much higher.

[Warren Stupidity]

60. People of the East Coast: Leave or Die!

Try applying what is being done to the Lebanese to your own life and get back to me about how it is not a terror campaign. Try being honest with yourself.

[MaraJade]

88. Apply what is being done to the Israelis to your own life. . .

. . .someone stalks into the local supermarket with a bomb strapped to their chest and detonates right at the checkout counters on Christmas Eve. . .

You get a telephone call from your child's school notifying you that the
school bus exploded. . .

Missiles are fired from offshore to land right on Grand Central Station at the peak of rush hour. . .

If these sorts of things happened to us, most Americans would want to get the ones perpetrating the terrorist actions.

I am amazed by some people here. There are some who actually believe that the Israelis should be sheep who do nothing to defend themselves from attack, that their government should conceed and conceed to its enemies until there is no Israel, until the last Israeli is pushed into the sea. After all, this is what Hamas and Hezbollah want--the destruction of the State of Israel.

I hear no constructive answers or solutions to their problem being
brought forth here. Everything over there is the fault of Israel. There are no suicide bombers. There are no missiles coming over the border to destroy Israeli naval vessels or trainstations at rush hour.
Those weren't Israeli civilians killed with the bus blew up. Noting to see there. Move along.

What is wrong with you people?

Of course war is not the answer. But what should one do when faced with a "neighborhood menace?"

[nashville_brook]

65. what have "we" become? --have we become what we hate?

isn't that the four hundred pound elephant in the room stomping all over us?

that, of all people, you'd think post-holocaust folk (jews -- israelis if you prefer -- the chosen ones -- hebrewiesteins-- ya'll) would be weary of such posturing. come on. what are you fighting for?

what are YOU fighting for, here, as a word-warrior?

what, in your experience of the democratic underground would give you the idea that PREEMPTIVE WAR or COLLECTIVE PUNISHMENT would find a friendly ear. call us far out lefites if you must, but (speaking for myself) i came to DU to dialogue for truth and reason. i don't care if the jewish people, space aliens or mickey mouse is behind what's going on.

no one gets a free ride on the way to world war three.

[ComerPerro]

55. LOL,

[blitzen]

69. Israel targets Christian TV stations, kills Christian TV guys

either that or they're terribly incompent and have no business waging the kind of campaign they are


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1703721

[SammyBlue]

70. Wow. . .people become pro Jewish and people's real colors show

Hezbollah and Hamas kill Jewish people and the world and most other people say nothing. Jews launch and offensive and Jews get criticized.

Wow!!!

[mitchtv]

71. Yeah, poor Isreal

:nopity:

[SammyBlue]

74. Yes, Hal Turner.

[mitchtv]

75. whoever the fuck that is

Sorry I don't go for ethnic cleansing

[Name removed]

76. Deleted message

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

[jonnyblitz]

78. Hal Turner is basically a white supremicist talk show host

out of new jersey, i do believe.

[mitchtv]

94. thanks

Mea culpa, I criticized the big "I". that makes me an anti semite

[Warren Stupidity]

79. Nice try.

I have repeatedly stated that both Hezbollah and Israel are committing war crimes. Any criticism of Israel is routinely interpreted by the Israel Can Do No Wrong camp as support for the other side. That, my fellow DUer, is what is known as a false dichotomy.

[SammyBlue]

81. That, my fellow DUer, is called he's tired of hearing how Israel is always

wrong.

Israel gets attacked, Israel is blamed.

Israel attacks, Israel is blamed.

It's the only country in the world that can do no right by anyone!

[Warren Stupidity]

95. And once again the facts are quite uncomfortable.

There is plenty of blame to go around. There is plenty of attacking from both sides. However, the entire content of my post was not blaming anyone, it was disputing the assertion that 'Hezbollah targets civilians while Israel does not target civilians'. The evidence is that both sides are targeting civilians. Deal with the evidence and stop with the insults.

[sinogirl]

82. 330 Lebanese dead (15 military) - 29 Israelis dead (15 military)

15 military personnel killed on both sides..!

Seems about even to me.

[SammyBlue]

85. Yes, Israel indiscriminately targets civilians just to get its jollies.

It's the Jewish way to kill civilians. At least, Hal Turner and that wing of the political spectrum thinks so. Amazing how alot of posts mirror that sentiment.

[sinogirl]

90. Does Israel take any precautions what so ever.....

..... to avoid the death of civilians...? If so, please provide the evidence.

Israel doesn't give a damn if Arab civilians are killed..! No one is going to hold them to account for their deaths, include the US and UN.

That's my concern.....


It may be the Israel way to kill civilians, but not the Jewish way. Kindly avoid mixing the two.

Israel could have fought this war without killing so many civilians. Ask your self what objective has been achieved by all the civilian deaths??? Absolutely none.

The bombings have failed, which is why Israel is forced to send in ground troop! It must achieve a tangible objective to justify the indiscriminate killing of civilians. Israel has now chosen to kill even more civilians and take over Lebanese land. They say this invasion is short-term, but I assure you Israel is there for the long term, probably even permanently.

Israel should have just gone ahead and invaded South Lebanon without the Beirut bombings....

[Name removed]

91. Deleted message

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

[sinogirl]

93. I want to believe it SammyBlue

I can't do it blindly... wish I could.

My Cousin is an IDF officer.... so I'm much closer than you.

[Warren Stupidity]

97. Do you think that calling everyone who disagrees with you a nazi

is a good way to win arguments? Who are you trying to impress?

[Mr_Spock]

86. Thanks for showing that's facts speak louder than rhetoric

I'm tired of all the idiotic arguments to justify the slaughter of children.

[SammyBlue]

87. Yet, when Hezbollah and Hamas slaughter children, the world turns

a blind eye.

Hell, some DUers (who am I kidding, alot of DUers) blame Israel for the suicide bombings that kill Israeli children.

Israel. . .damned if they do, damned if they don't.

[MaraJade]

89. I guess that some here think that if the school bus has Israeli kids. . .

Those kids don't count as children if the bus is bombed.

Go figure.

[SammyBlue]

92. Well, in the history of the world, Jewish blood has always been cheap.

Ask Russia, Germany, France, Spain, Britian, The Baltics, Austria, Italy and the Turks.

[Warren Stupidity]

98. Ok sammy please document that assertion.

"Hell, some DUers (who am I kidding, alot of DUers) blame Israel for the suicide bombings that kill Israeli children."

I think you just crossed the line there sammy.

[Mr_Spock]

100. You are comparing the act of murder to a countries official bombing

campaign!

I care about every child who is killed by a murderer. This is especially true about random acts of terrorism by people who are willing to kill themselves and other people for the wrong reasons.

Now, to compare those random acts of murder to a governments deliberate bombing campaign that has killed 90% civilians is ludicrous.

Even Hizbollah had only killed 50% civilians and only 10% as many people as Israels deliberately bad targeting.

[Crunchy Frog]

96. Both sides just have very bad aim. n/t

[Warren Stupidity]

99. I realize that you meant that as a snark, but...

one of the claims made frequently by both Israel and the US as we both go around blowing up civilians is that we have all this high tech precision weaponry. Hezbollah has rather shitty missiles with no particular claim to precision. So one side has very bad aim. The other side supposedly doesn't.

I continue to assert that both Hezbollah and the IDF are conducting terror campaigns against he civilian populations of Israel and Lebanon and that both should be condemned for their actions and that the world should demand a complete unconditional bilateral ceasefire.

That seems to some here a position that borders on neo-nazism and/or clearly is cheerleading for Hezbollah, but I will continue to both hold that position and post on it until I am convinced by facts rather than emotional bullshit that I am wrong.

[Crunchy Frog]

102. I agree with you.

I find I've mostly been posting sarcastic one-liners lately. I'm not sure if it's because other people express my thoughts on these issues far better than I can, or because I'm afraid that some people on here will hate me forever if I express my thoughts more completely than I have been.

This whole thing is a horrible mess, and it is particularly sad because of the way it is tearing apart the fabric of the progressive online community.