Digg

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at covertress.blogspot.com

Hizballah Shows Its Face

covertress.blogspot.com — A masked Shiite gunman laughs as Hizballah fighters seized control of west Beirut on May 9, 2008. The Hizballah-led opposition seized control of the western sector of the Lebanese capital on Friday after a third day of battles with pro-government foes in the Lebanese capital pushed the nation dangerously close to all-out civil war.

Bury

covertress 77 days ago

60 diggs
digg it

Johneeeee, on 05/09/2008, -1/+16Jimmy Carter's heros strike again
rcnevada, on 05/09/2008, -1/+13This is from the Wikipedia: The W54 was the smallest nuclear warhead deployed by the United States. It was a very compact implosion-type nuclear weapon design, designed for tactical use and had a very low yield for a nuclear weapon.
-- Just a thought.
clvngodess, on 05/09/2008, -12/+1They're my heroes too.
covertress, on 05/09/2008, -1/+7Your comment seems to imply that you're pro-Hizballah...(confused)
CaptainAmerica1, on 05/09/2008, -1/+9This is gonna get way worse before it gets better.
IconoclastStill, on 05/10/2008, -1/+8Either we step up and put an end to these crazies over there or we will be fighting them here. And if we do drop a nuke, pea-nuts ought to be tied to it.
InRussetShadows, on 05/10/2008, -1/+7What I don't understand is why the other Arabic nations are willing to sit around and let Iran -- through Hezbollah -- have sway in the area.
- Stevanoski, on 05/10/2008, -0/+5No truer statement/question. If it was not for little Israel uniting their hatred they would be at each others throats as history has shown. The Arabs are not a very peacable people. And the US would be in the Middle East in even a bigger way.
- sultanknish, on 05/11/2008, -0/+4They're not happy with it. Egypt and Saudi Arabia as the lead Sunni nations have been taking a darker tone with Iran but everyone knows they're not actually going to do anything about it, besides make statements mildly critical of Iran. For one thing their own domestic radicals are beginning to admire how well Iran is getting results
retr0grade, on 05/11/2008, -3/+2... "fighting them here?" Why? People make this argument, but I don't see any credible support for the idea. To the extent that people are killing each other over religious beliefs, boo hoo and all that, but it's not *OUR* fault (where 'us' is the USA) that they put their "holy land" in the same place as a bunch of other religions. I think it's much more likely that they'll just keep killing each other over there, because that's where the land is that they're fighting over.
Granted, we might be propping up one side of the conflict by giving them guns and money to buy more guns. And I think that's a terrible foreign policy, and that we should stop, and let both "sides" be reduced to throwing rocks at each other. To be totally isolationist and cold-hearted about it, I'm not so sure I understand why anyone who lives in the US should give two g*ddannms about a bunch of people killing each other when they all live 16,000 miles away from you. So a bunch of people shot at a bunch of other people in Lebanon... so what?

When was the last time you were in Lebanon? Or talked to anyone who lives there? Or bought anything made there? Or, you know, could find it on a map without a magnifying glass and Google Earth to help you out? Why do you care at all? Why even *pretend* to care?

Apart from a general and poorly-reasoned sense that people killing other people is somehow uncivilized, why should anyone care?
- dkapuchino, on 05/11/2008, -1/+4You really havent a clue about world history and global politics, ha?
  This is them blowing up our embassy in Lebanon: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_1983_U.S._Embas ...
  This is them hijacking a commercial airline: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TWA_Flight_847
  This is them blowing up an embassy in Buenos Aires (That's in argentina, which is in south america, just In case you don't know or care to know): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_Israeli_Embassy_ ...
  This is them killing 240 US marines, in their sleep: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Beirut_barracks_ ...
  They've already made the US as a target. That's why people make this argument, above is the credible support for the Idea.
  - retr0grade, on 05/12/2008, -0/+1Thanks for making my point for me. Notice the pattern? None of that is "here." If we weren't supporting military occupations and dictatorships that undermine sovereign states in a way that forecloses the legitmate political autonomy of people living in those countries, they wouldn't have any reason to make those attacks.
    
    Notice the other pattern? The embassy bombing was 25 years ago. We sure have made a lot of progress since then... oh wait no we haven't, the US military has been effectively neutered, Iran knows that it has nothing to be afraid of, and Hizballah now has all the force and organization it needs to shut down an entire country.
    
    In case you missed it, Hizballah *OWNS* Beirut, and most of the rest of Lebanon. They even have their own fiber-optic telecom infrastructure, entirely separate from the "official" state-sanctioned network. As this story notes, they shut down the entire country, in the course of just a few hours, essentially just to show that they could do it. Anyone who wants to talk about the balance of power in the region MUST recognize that Hizballah can't be left out of the equation. The only thing keeping them from assuming political power in a legitimate sense is that the US and Israel continue to supply the existing Lebanese government with money and guns.
    
    And since denial has obviously been working so well for us for the past 25 years, by all means we should just keep it up.
Login or register to add a comment

Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.

Hizballah Shows Its Face

Login or register to add a comment