If Palestinians believe they are the first to be "thrown out to make room"....they might want to read a little history....like that of the Romans....or they may want to speak with a Native American.

I understand it must suck being on the losing side of history....but the war was fought....the side occupying the land in question lost....and the victors divided it as they saw fit....it's a done deal and they seem to be the only ones who don't know it, so drag other sovereigns into the fight....of which you are one.

Welcome to the history of mankind and the creation of nations in the ashes of war....


If Hizbullah represents the sovreignty of Lebanon..........No.

If Hizbullah does not represent the sovreignty of the Lebanon..........Yes.

If Hizbullah acts of it's own accord without the advice and consent of the government of Lebanon, it is a terrorist entity.

If it acts under the advice and consent of the government of Lebanon, then it is a proxy representative of the government of Lebanon....and at this point, I would believe a state of war would exist between Israel and Lebanon.


I would need more information....based on how you answer my questions above.

Israel is sovereign.

Lebanon is sovereign.

Hizbullah IS NOT sovereign.....it either acts as a terrorist entity against the sovereign....or as a proxy for the sovereign.

And it's just as reasonable to assume that Israel would lock Palestinians up for even the slightest transgression - if there is even a transgression at all. The US does it to black people, so I see little reason or evidence as to why Israel wouldn't do the same thing to Arabs.

That was my point.

Those 199 bodies Israel has accumulated over 30 years represents just a fraction of the total casulties they've inflicted in the same amount of time.


I said neither party got an upper hand because Hezbollah got 200 dead bodies along with 5 living ones. Israel got two dead bodies. The immediate reaction of the media and everyone watching is to feel sorry for Israel where as I just feel sorry for both parties involved. Now tell me where I said I don't care that Kantar got released, cause I won't tolerate you attacking my morals, which are firmly rooted in the respect for ALL life, regardless of the country they come from.

The few people I've spoken to on this subject disagree with me, taking the media's prespective that Israel DID get the short end of the stick. I don't why you're pretending the issue is being reported differently.

And like I said before, the 5 terrorists were arrested for being "guerillas" rather then any specific crime. Does this make them inocent? No, and I'm not saying it does. I'm saying the facts surrounding these terrorists are virtually unknown and subject to bias.

As for Kantar, I'm surprised Israel gave him up, but he rode back on a tidal wave of other dead Palestinians... so I think that needs to be considered as well.


And Hezbollah gave away 2 dead Isreali soldiers for 200 dead Palestinians. 100 to 1? Does Israel only value Palestinians that much?

You respect someone's value, right?

Then what the hell are we arguing about?


The 199 bodies Israel gave up weren't alive, mdma.

And I'm not entirely sure what you're saying there at the end.

Hezbollah accepted 199 dead Palestinians for 2 dead Isrealies. Obviously Israel doesn't respect Palestinians that much...

Equally, Hezbollah doesn't respect Isrealis that much.

In my opinion, neither side in this war is free from guilt.


I think the Palestinians have as much a right to exist as Israel. The Palestinians work through Hezbollah while Israel works through the IAF and the US.

Neither group makes the right decisions and neither group is any more responsible in it's use of force then the other.

Sorry for being so objective on the issue .

Certaintly more of a right then the US gave to the Native Americans...

As for the specifics, if I anyone had an answer to that, we wouldn't be having this discussion. It would have been solved by now.

What's accomplished in asking me the question no one has ever been able to answer yet?

Well, I don't think this is the place to debate this, but can't we agree that the US mis-handled the whole issue? And continues to do so today?


Each side's legitimacy and how to make sure both can exist without conflict...

... or did I misunderstand your question?

Possibly....but the fact remains the US was sovereign....and the natives lost the war....and were subject to the whims of the victors.


You understand the question and are smart enough to know the answer.

Israel is soverign...Palestinians are not....they are on the losing side of history like Native Americans.

They can be absorbed into sovereigns such as Syria, Lebanon, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia or Israel...or they can continue to drag sovereigns like Lebanon into conflict with Israel....but they represent no government, are not sovereign and act as terrorists against the sovereign.

How is it disgusting?  I was simply trying to put into perspective that the 199 bodies returned were casualties of a conflict that has gone on for 30 years.  I didn't suggest anything else other than that.  The implication was that Israel kills 199 times for every 2 people it loses.  The OP was pointing out that he didn't think either side made out ahead because Israel causes far more casualties.  I think the number is skewed in this case as those 199 bodies came from a period of 30 years.


I see Israel working to protect its citizens, not its land.  There is a big difference between the two.  I believe Israel is perfectly justified in targeting terrorists but never made any attempt to justify targeting civilians, imprisoning the innocent, or torturing any prisoners.  And no, in my opinion, Israel is not fighting an occupation.  Israel is not fighting a nation's armed forces for one, they are not fighting against a group that has to follow international laws, and they are not fighting a group that has to answer to anyone in Lebanon.  Simply put, Israel is fighting against a group who's own country is unable to control.

So now I have two questions for you:


1)  I have NEVER ever in my entire life made the claim that people cannot fight an occupying force.  You are not terrorists for doing that, nor are Iraqi insurgents "terrorists" when they fight the American military in Iraq.  You cross the line into terrorism when you intentionally attack civilian targets to a) cause fear in an attempt to bring about political change, or b) kill for the sole sake of killing those you believe to be unworthy of life.

That is what makes one a terrorist.  Hezbollah is a terrorist group by this definition.

2)  I do not believe torture to ever be justified, though I can think of instances where one has to understand its application (like the hidden nuclear bomb case).  However, Syria as an occupying force was justified in imprisoning those who were actively fighting against Syria.  It is an unfortunate consequence of war and a risk those fighting had to take.  It is the same for US soldiers in Iraq - justified in imprisoning those taking up arms against coalition forces.  The same can be said for US soldiers in Germany or Japan, British soldiers in America in the late 18th century, and every other instance in world history.

You've made assumptions that I give Israel a free pass.  I do not.  I have many times disagreed with Israel and found myself condemning their actions on plenty of occasions.  This is a case where I believe Israel made a big mistake as

1)  They acheived no tactical advantage but instead, strengthened Hezbollah
2)  They acheived no political advantage as Hezbollah used it for propaganda victory and nobody is willing to give Israel any credit for releasing live prisoners in exchange for bodies.

That is the point I try to make.  This was not in my opinion, as the OP believes, as case where both sides walk away without any gain over the other. 

That is why I don't understand why you've been so nasty in your posts.  There is no need to call me bloodthirsty or brainwashed.  I've never harmed a soul nor do I take pleasure in seeing people suffer.  I don't think Israeli lives are worth any more than Lebanese lives, but I'm not sure Hezbollah shares that opinion.  Just a thought.

Note:

International law is useful only when it benefits someone. Otherwise, they are a sham and broken frequently.

I think you are seeing malice where there may not be any, at least not in any significant quantity.  The US does not "do it" to black people - certainly not as a matter of policy.  I think the same is true with Israel.  It costs money to hold prisoners, if they are innoncent of any wrong doing and Israel knows it, it invites the possibility of massive public backlash from the international community and it tarnishes Israel's image even further.  There are of course going to be cases where innocent people are jailed just as will always be the case until humans cease to exist.  Nothing will ever change that as mistakes are not going to disappear any time soon.  Indeed there will always be the odd-ball case of criminal wrongdoing where some jerk on a power trip wants to throw an Arab in jail for no reason.  Again, I don't see this as something widespread or at epidemic levels.  What I do see is MILLIONS of people gathering in public forums burning flags, chanting "death to Israel", inciting hatred of Israel, and marching around with their children dressed up like Rambo.  This speaks volumes and does very little to support the case that many jailed are innocent of any wrongdoing.  From what I can see, and more importantly from what I hear out of the mouths of angry Arabs in that part of the world makes me believe that Israel probably holds thousands in prison, and most are probably there for a good reason.


And indeed just a fraction of the total casualties Israel has endured as well - it is a two-way street.



Easy now - I never attacked your morals.  It was a question that was perhaps poorly worded, but completely relevent to the discussion.  I see the release of a man who killed one Israeli man and smashed the skull of a four-year old Israeli girl completely ridiculous, irresponsible, and immoral.  I see it as a bad move, especially when that murderer is greeted as a hero and vows to fight again.  At the crux of the issue is your assertion that Israel and Hezbollah made out equally well (or not at all).  I think the propaganda victory alone for Hezbollah completely invalidates this position.  My point was that a known terrorist is now back in the mix with a desire to inflict more harm.  Israel has two dead bodies, hardly strengthening them tactically or politically.


Well, those people happen to be right.  I'm not pretending the issue is being reported differently, but rather debating someone who thinks it should be..............


Perhaps, but one of those 5 has already vowed to fight again.  I'm putting my money on the fact that they all find their way back into the fight before long.


Not really.  He committed double murder (only one murder if the word of a murderer is good enough for you - you being 3^rd person, don't get upset).  Regardless of anything that has happened, that man has no business ever seeing the outside of a prison cell.


Something is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it.  Israel didn't set the "price", Hezbollah did.  It isn't Israel that created the value, it is Hezbollah.  Israel would have given 200 dead Palistinians for every Israeli held captive and more.  Would Hezbollah have agreed to a 2 for 2 deal?  No way in the world.  Israel would have, and it would have been an equal 1 to 1, right?