What is Digg?Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate
Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate.Sponsored by openforum.com
How to Use Social Media to Retain Customers view!
openforum.com - There are many times or reasons that a small business will receive an influx of new customers...
128 Comments
- bshniper, on 10/12/2007, -4/+43If Hizbollah's only goal was to shoot down the bombers to protect Lebanese civilians, wouldn't it make sense to place the aa guns in fields so those civilians are protected against strikes on AA guns?
Of course. So what does that mean? - BloodJunkie, on 10/12/2007, -9/+44@supremo, the subject of the photos in your submission from 2 days ago are civilian casualties caused by Israel. The subject of these photos is Hezbollah waging war in residential areas. There is a difference.
- Robotsu, on 10/12/2007, -4/+38Very very interesting photos, cool Digg. However I don't think the fact that Hezbollah operated in residential areas was ever in question.
- BloodJunkie, on 10/12/2007, -12/+45Maybe from non-residential areas? You shouldn't spam in your comments, mikkaworkscom.
- BloodJunkie, on 10/12/2007, -16/+49A picture of an anti-aircraft gun being used in a residential area does prove that Hezbollah is waging war in the suburbs.
And I agree with you about the pictures you submitted. There are more than 1 sides to any war and I don't think anyone should get away with killing civilians. - anphanax, on 10/12/2007, -7/+36Nice strategy those jerks are using. Fight war in suburbia, ensuring civilian casualties, and then blame it on the other side when the inevitable happens.
Hezbollah seems to be claiming they care about the Lebanese, and yet here they are, putting them in danger on purpose. - radixxx, on 10/12/2007, -25/+53@supremo
Hizballah has been doing this to Israeli women and children for 20+ years. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -10/+37It's no secret these terrorist cowards are using civilian homes to hide their operations.
- greenamp, on 10/12/2007, -6/+29The pictures don't really show anything definitive. That being said, it is radical Muslim militantism 101 to wage war from behind civilians, and when attacked make a media spectacle about the innocents killed.
It's a very sad state of affairs, b/c the other side of the conflict is damned if they do, and damned if they don't.
What would the United States do if a militant group based used the shelter of Mexico City to lob rockets into San Antonio? - neko6, on 10/12/2007, -23/+46There is something I really don't understand.
When Muslims massacared on purpose between 50,000 to half a million Christian civilians in Sudan:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darfur_conflict
The UN didn't condemn them... But when Israel kills 400 Muslim civilians by accident, the UN tries to condemn them. Could it be that the UN is just Muslim agents? - zeero, on 10/12/2007, -5/+27^ what the f.. are you idiots talking about. grow up or get off digg.
- LoungeActx, on 10/12/2007, -9/+30These people are cowards hiding behind innocent civilians. I'm sure Israel has no interest in going after civilians, but Hezbollah brings innocent people into the front lines by hiding behind the them.
- morbis242, on 10/12/2007, -3/+21The flaw in your logic is that it is not the Lebanese military with the anti-aircraft gun, it's Terrorists. It's for launching rockets into Israel. And their cowardly using innocent civilians as cover.
- vitalyb, on 10/12/2007, -5/+22In a war you win by pounding your oponnent.
Not by being "higher" morally. Or USA was higher morally than Japan when they nuked them?
This perverted view on war will really get Europe on its knees one day, when they actually try to fight a new psychopath (North Korea? Iran?) with "surgical" blows. Leave surgery to the doctors. - GeneralAntilles, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15You don't debate TERRORISTS. It doesn't work that way. Terrorists use what's called bargaining in bad faith, their promises are empty and they always go back on them. The only thing they understand and respect (especially muslim terrorists) is force and more force, and force is the only way to defeat terrorists.
- Zero82z, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15So we're supposed to sympathize with the terrorists using civilians as cannon fodder because otherwise they'd be wiped out?
- musikal1, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15There is so much blame to spread around between all of the factions involved that everyone of them is standing on morally shaky ground. But if the article above is true, it is a travesty that Hezbollah would use the Lebanese people as essentially human shields, making the Israelis have to fire into areas that civilians are taking shelter in.
- Dotnetsky, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13The problem is a lot bigger than just Hez militants convincing Lebanese civilians to let them store their rocket launchers in the bedroom. All over the Arab world a minority of radicaly Mullas, Imams and Sheiks are indoctrinating and brainwashing little 2 years old toddlers to "kill America" and "death to Israel". We got a big fyookin problem here. MUCH bigger than Israel / Lebanon.
- szelij, on 10/12/2007, -7/+18Hezbollah is a guerrilla outfit. Are people surprised that guerrillas use these tactics? When coming up against a military that you can't win conventionally, you must use guerrilla tactics...
- greenamp, on 10/12/2007, -5/+16You really think 3 guys on an old truck with a rocket launching platform are gonna shoot down an F-15? The trucks shown in the images are for launching katyushas.
- BloodJunkie, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13LOL, think of it as an anti-war BloodJunkie post ;)
I hacked my own account. I'm freakin l33t. - adriand, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11ok people the war did not *start* when/because some soldiers were kidnapped. that is simply the Precipitating Event. The American revolution did not suddenly explode after the "shot heard around the world". It was many years in the making, we just choose that as the starting event because it is in our nature to see cause/effect relationships. When the cause is too complex, we simply pick the latest, most significant, event as "the one".
anyone who believes this started over a single, isolated event is just as stupid as those people who believe we went to war with Iraq because of either 9-11/WMD/Osama/etc. - twinklyJesus, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12@returnofmalv:
"So how would you fight a war if you were vastly underpowered and without jets or helicopters? What kind of ***** retards mod this comment up? Hezbollah are vastly underpowered and they are fighting against the 4th largest military force in the world. How does Israel approach these guerilla fighters? By random bombing populated cities filled with civilians."
I wouldn't start a war with an army that is vastly superior, for one. How does Hezbollah start the war? By firing rockets into Israel's civilian population. At that point, as far as I'm concerned, the gloves are off. Apparently, Hezbollah is not required to abide by any civilized rules of war, why should Israel be held to a higher standard?
"Anyone that thinks that Hezbollah are cowards needs to get their head checked. Israel has already decided that killing women and children in exchange for a few Hezbollah guerillas is worth the price. ***** them."
Anyone who hides in populated neighborhoods, firing missiles into other populated neighborhoods, intentionally drawing fire onto innocent populations ARE cowards. There is no other description. Hezbollah decided that getting Lebanese women and children killed was a small price to pay in order to drum up support, money and more arms from Syria, Iran and other Muslim countries. The aggressor chooses the battle and the battlefield, they just weren't expecting Israel to react quite so furiously. Stupid miscalculation, and, a definite "***** you" from Israel. - hadees, on 10/12/2007, -6/+16@d00ley:
That is pure propaganda.
Here is a link to an interview with Mahmoud Komati who is the deputy chief of the Hezbollah's political arm.
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=2236341
In it he admits they started it by attacking an Israeli military area.
"The truth is let me say this clearly we didn't even expect (this) response -- that (Israel) would exploit this operation for this big war against us," said Komati.
He said Hezbollah had expected "the usual, limited response" from Israel after the two soldiers were seized by guerrillas on Israel's side of the border on July 12."
"Komati said Hezbollah captured the Israeli soldiers from a military area, but charged that Israelis had taken Hezbollah leaders from their homes at night." - monolith, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12Or not fire missiles as well as AA from populated civilian areas.
- matrixarchitect, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13Ummmm, yes they do prove it as do the videos on YouTube showing Hezbullah firing from civilian residences. You can't expect Israel to choose to sacrifice their own civilians to the rocket attacks from Hezbullah instead of taking out those rockets at the risk of civilian casualties. I remember reading that the fundamental difference between Israel and Hezbullah is essentially that when Israel misses its targets civilians die, but when Hezbullah HITS its targets, civilians die.
- greenamp, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Pass the joint around plz.
- SirYuri, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11i agree. Many are to blame, but I think that using civilians as human shields just to make Israel look bad when they fire back is a horrible tactic that people need to realize... and people need to stop pointing fingers or guns and do some debating with their MOUTHS...
- noliberalbull, on 10/12/2007, -11/+18You may be perhaps the biggest idiot I've ever heard. "The only way that this can be eradicated is worldwide pacifism" may be correct on some absurd level, but it would require one to believe there is no right or wrong, and, whether you know it or not sir, there is.
- greenamp, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12Yeah I'm sure they hired some mideast actors and staged the pictures too huh?
- twinklyJesus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7It would make sense to put the AA gun in a location where you would have long-range peripheral angles to aim and shoot at incoming aircraft. In that position you would have very little time to shoot at an aircraft passing over that street. You just don't put AA guns in trenches, which is exactly what that street becomes. Unless of course, you were placing it so it would be hit and get maximum collateral damage.
- Rivetgeek, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9Yeah the last 3000 YEARS have shown us all that the Arabs and the Jews are destined to become fast friends.
Get real dude. This fight is older than Jesus. Literally. - sithmat, on 10/12/2007, -16/+21While I do not doubt that Hezbollah is making lovely use of civilian infrastructure to protect themselves from IDF retaliation, this article is less than convincing.
Three photos does not a conclusion make. - RenZ87, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7@neko
I think you need to read your source
It says both the Janjaweed and Baggara tribes are followers of Islam. So i don't know where you're getting half a million Christians from. - kdingo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6@dotnetsky
And *that* is what causes this problem between Israel/West and the Muslim world to persist. You have an entire generation of children embracing the idea that Israel is evil, and Bush is Satan. They are repeatedly told this enough that they believe it, that their enemies aren't human, and they are under attack.
I strongly encourage people to view this movie, for what current events really are: a repetition in history. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6162397493278181614 - twinklyJesus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6@noahhoward:
By your "logic" Israel would never be able to fire a shot in defense, and therefore, would ultimately lose. Eventually Hezbollah would move into populations closer and closer to TelAviv and Jerusalem, continuing to fire rockets from populated areas.
They are counting on world opinion and UN pressure to keep Israel from wiping their fanatcal asses out. Remember, Israel did not fire first. The kidnapped Israeli soldiers did not park their Humvees in Israel and walk into Lebanon, they were ambushed IN Israel.
There is no logical defense for Hezbollah's actions other than an attempt to stage a small conflict in order to attain better standing in the Muslim world. This would get them more money and arms. Unfortunately, it backfired and now they're in a spot. Iran is pissed at them for putting so much attention on them, as they are the major supplier of the rockets (through Syria) that Hezbollah are using.
So, now, Hezbolla is trying to create an event that will be news worthy enough to turn world opinion against Israel, hence the huge amount of women and children in the basement of that building while rockets were being fired from beside it. It was everything they'd hoped for. - jonj, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8yet the "innocent civilians" will complain to no end if a precision airstrike happens to blow up the neighborhood where the AA guns are residing :ugh:
- SomeJoe, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7So if Hezbollah is wearing civilian clothing, how can we possibly gather an accurate count of civilian casualties?
Taking the gun out of a dead guy's hand would be all that's necessary to add one to the civilian count and subtract one from Hezbollah's. - twinklyJesus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5@Snypa:
There is no "pro Israel bias" on Digg. There is however, a bias against those who, without warning fire missiles into civilian populations. That is the biggest stumbling block the jihadists have. Instead of filing grievances through appropriate diplomatic channels, they take matters into their own hands and kill innocent civilians randomly (see WTC). No population deserves this. There is no historical justification for it.
If there is an issue with Israel or any other world government, the matter should be taken up with the offended party's OWN government. The offended party's government should then take it up with the UN who would address it appropriately. IF the offended party's government fails to address the issue, then the matter should be taken up with THAT government not the civilians in the offending nation. If Hezbollah and Hamas leaders are not addressing issues that the population of their countries feel is imperative, then the failure is with THEIR government.
Most people in the "west" maintain a live and let live policy on the world. It would be the path of least resistance for the US to adopt a hands-off policy toward Israel, if they were perceived as not operating within their legal rights. When they are attacked without warning by entities who are not recognized representatives of any government, it is hard to view the situation otherwise. No amount of spin or propaganda will change this. You can show all the horrible dead-baby photos you want and it will still be perceived by most to be the fault of the aggressors, here, the ones who fired first. Taking hostages to gain political or financial advantage while apparently acceptable or common in the Middle
East, is considered a reprehensible and cowardly act to the rest of the world. A cultural, tribal behavior that was lost to us a thousand years ago.
Hezbollah is not the recognized representative of the Lebanon government and therefore, no matter what the reason, any actions undertaken by them will be viewed as illegal by the rest of the world. This doesn't mean we don't sympathize with the Lebanese people and this doesn't excuse the Lebanese people from inactivity by allowing Hezbollah to act un-restrained in their population.
Taking hostages to force the release of prisoners held for terrorist acts against Israel, or for the return of lands taken by Israel due to attacks being carried out from them, does not change things. Placating the jihadists is more and more being recognized as impossible, with few remaining options available. When Israel pulls out of Gaza with the agreement that attacks will cease, the attacks on Israel increase. Israel declares a cease-fire for humanitarian aid to the stricken regions, Hezbollah continues firing missiles. What does this say? Israel is forced to abide by rules of civilized warfare and Hezbollah does not. You can't have it both ways. Either you respect the civilian population of the government you attack OR you suffer the consequences.
During WWII the Allied Armies would not have considered bombing Germany's civilians until it became apparent that Germany had no similar attitude (which was agreed on at The Hague after WWI) We continued to function under the rules of war outlined by the Geneva convention even though the Japanese clearly did not. When it was discovered just how ruthlessly they had slaughtered Chinese civilians during their occupation and how they had been killing POWs wholesale, we no longer held respect for their civilian populations. It was easy to send a message with nuclear weapons.
My point is, we (the west) will bicker amongst ourselves about what is right and wrong, until the jihadists push matters too far, then things will change. Walking the line that Hezbollah has been walking, trying to create tragic incidents with which to turn opinion against Israel, can very easily backfire on them with overwhelmingly negative results. In other words, they need to quit while they can and stop when Israel stops. It doesn't help their case any when they keep up aggression. It looks like they have another agenda beside "defense." - eyalfein, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4That's it?
There have been many images published by other sources, like the missile launcher hidden behind a mosque (and later, a footage of Israeli soldiers manually disabling it). - justodd, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5The article you linked to doesn't really support the argument your making.
The way it reads is that there was a clash at the border where the two soldiers were captured. As a result of that, Israeli forces entered Lebanon to get them back.
The way it's written seems to imply that only after the initial attack on them did Israeli forces enter Lebanon. It implies that they were, as they have claimed all along, the original "victim" in this incident.
Do you have a better source link on this anywhere? - dobbes, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6"Photos Proving Hezbollah Waging War In Suburbia"
There was never any doubt about that ...
they seem to be pretty happy posing and all though, bit staged IMO - IbnDigg, on 10/12/2007, -10/+14You show your ignorance of the the Darfur conflict. The casualties are not as much christian as Muslim
- twinklyJesus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4They aren't undercover police, *****. They're an illegal paramilitary fanatical organization. Lebanon HAS an army, and it's not Hezbollah.
- Bioshocker, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Last time I checked, neither side was asking for a ceasefire. Both sides are happy to bomb/rocket each other to oblivion and neither really cares how many "enemy" civilians go down with them.
- spinchange, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4i can't believe this is reported as inaccurate.
as if the pics don't speak for themselves... I haven't read or heard of Hezbollah denying any of this. You may disagree w/ Israel's response, but how can anyone who pretends to care about or follow this story justify and ignore what Hezbollah is doing here too?? - Modulo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6this is horrifying, I fully agree with the original posters point and demand that we immediately start providing 2 billion dollars a year to Hezzbollah so that they can afford to throw a proper war.
- rtonkins, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4worldwide pacifism....You grossly overestimate the capacity of the human race when it comes to basic human insticts. There will never be such a thing.
- omaryak, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I don't think anyone has been saying that Hezbollah hasn't been using residential areas to mount attacks. I think where the crticism has been is that a conventional military campaign to destroy these residential areas will stop the attacks. Not to mention people losing their homes, relatives, lives, etc...
- Bioshocker, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I don't know what article you found at that link, but I found one which had the UN calling for a ceasefire. The UN isn't on anyone's side. It's a neutral organization. I didn't see any mention of either Israel or Hezbollah calling for a ceasefire.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 128 discussions
