Peres: Cluster bombs a mistake

[oberliner]

Shimon Peres, Israel's deputy prime minister, has told Al Jazeera that his country's use of cluster bombs in Lebanon during last year's war with Hezbollah was a "mistake".

Unexploded ordnance in the country has killed at least 27 people and wounded more than 140 since the end of the war, including two Belgian soldiers injured on Monday.

Peres said in an exclusive interview broadcast on Tuesday that the bombs were dropped "apparently ... without the knowledge even of the chief-of-staff".

He told Al Jazeera's David Foster: "To be short and clear, we committed a mistake, regrettably."

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/26763D65-7F65-4848-9819-CCC4678CCC3A.htm

[nosmokes]

1. not a mistake - try illegal! n/t

[fooj]

2. A war crime?

[Missy M]

3. It's good he admitted it was a mistake....

a very costly mistake at that. If they were dropped without the knowledge even of the chief-of-staff who made the decision? Someone had to order them to be dropped.

[BayCityProgressive]

4. I wonder

would they just be a "mistake" if the Lebanese had dropped them on Israel?

[oberliner]

5. They did, and it wasn't

From Human Rights Watch:

Lebanon/Israel: Hezbollah Hit Israel with Cluster Munitions During Conflict
First Confirmed Use of Weapon Type

(Jerusalem, October 19, 2006) – Hezbollah fired cluster munitions into civilian areas in northern Israel during the recent conflict, Human Rights Watch reported today. This is the first time that Hezbollah’s use of these controversial weapons has been confirmed.

Hezbollah’s deployment of the Chinese-made Type-81 122mm rocket is also the first confirmed use of this particular model of cluster munition anywhere in the world. Human Rights Watch documented two Type-81 cluster strikes that took place on July 25 in the Galilee village of Mghar.

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/10/18/lebano14412.htm

[BayCityProgressive]

6. Ha

well let me taste my foot then! Not surprising, Hezbollah is grotesque just like Likud. I wasn't aware they had these weapons.

[calzone]

8. No moral equivalency.

A mistake? :-O

"The organisation cited statements from witnesses in Mghar, including some who had found "clearly identifiable pieces of submunitions and their casings"."

Here-say. HRW, the only source for this, is relying on here-say from folks with an ax to grind.

"In Lebanon, the UN has identified at least 749 locations that it says were hit by Israeli cluster weapons, making an estimated total of 4 million bomblets."

"Each of the Type-81 cluster munition 122mm rockets used by Hezbollah carries 39 Type-90 or MZD submunitions."

OK, if it's true that some members of Hizbullah fired two type 90 shells, that's 78 bomblets. Man. And a comparison is being drawn?
That's like the Iraqi bombardment with obsolete, WW2 era scuds that killed 4 Israelis being compared to Sharon's bloodfests.

"Separately, there have been reports in Lebanon that Israel is using phosphorous bombs in its offensive.

Doctors in hospitals in southern Lebanon say they suspect some of the burns they are seeing are being caused by phosphorous bombs.

Jawad Najem, a surgeon at the hospital in Tyre, told the Associated Press news agency that patients admitted on Sunday were burn cases that resulted from Israeli phosphorous incendiary weapons.

Lebanese President Emile Lahoud made an oblique reference to their use in an interview with French radio.

“According to the Geneva Convention, when they use phosphorous bombs and laser bombs, is that allowed against civilians and children?” he said on Monday.
The Geneva Conventions ban the use of white phosphorous as an incendiary weapon against civilian populations and in air attacks against military forces in civilian areas.
An Israeli military spokeswoman said arms used in Lebanon did not contravene international norms."

So Israel drops 4 million cluster bombs on Lebanese civilians, then apparently uses chemical weapons on the populace, but (2) retaliatory artillery shells with 78 bomblets from militia members that must immediately duck for cover because they must operate against complete air superiority is morally equivalent. This while Israeli jets precision-drop huge cluster bombs on civilians deliberately.

"Israel used cluster munitions in Lebanon in 1978 and in the 1980s.

Israel used cluster munitions earlier this year during fighting with Hezbollah around the contested Shebaa Farms area. Human Rights Watch is continuing to investigate these additional allegations."

http://www.envirosagainstwar.org/know/read.php?itemid=4777

But...that's not all. Just for watching, we're gonna send this bonus offer!

"The viciousness of the Israeli assault on Lebanon is underscored by the IDF's use of cluster bombs against civilian targets. As Jan Egeland, who heads up humanitarian operations for the United Nations, put it:

"What's shocking – and I would say to me completely immoral – is that 90% of the cluster bomb strikes occurred in the last 72 hours of the conflict, when we knew there would be a resolution. Every day people are maimed, wounded, and are killed by these ordnance."

As close to a million refugees return to their homes, 100,000 unexploded cluster bombs – most of them dropped by the Israelis in the closing hours of the war – lie in wait for them and their children. Kids often pick up such ordnance because of its resemblance to toys. Such is the sickening legacy of the Israeli aggression, which will continue to deal death long after "peace" is declared."

http://neworleans.indymedia.org/news/2006/09/8656_comment.php

Those damn anti-semitic, biased, indymedia propagandists!
Oh, something glaringly omitted in this thread....Hezbollah's response.

"But Hezbollah MP Hassan Hoballah told the BBC: "We did not use these bombs. We don't have them."

He added: "We reject the use of these bombs anywhere in the world because they hurt civilians, especially when dropped on residential areas. Our stance is consistent. It can never change."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6068154.stm

Bah! Arabs are incapable of telling the truth, a denial isn't worth even mentioning, huh?

[oberliner]

9. Human Rights Watch v. Hezbollah spokesman

Human Rights Watch says they have confirmed that Hezbollah fired cluster munitions into civilian areas in Israel.

A Hezbollah spokesman denies this accusation.

I guess people can decide who they want to believe.

I don't know what all the rest of your post is responding to. No attempt at moral equivalency was made.

[calzone]

12. You misrepresent the facts

It's not a case of a Hezbollah spokesperson against HRW. You apparently didn't read my post.
The HRW report uses here-say testimony, from people with an obvious axe to grind.
The spokesperson deserves to have his his statement posted, something you (and the article) omitted.
Obviously, the spokesperson can't prove a negative.
And obviously, you've fallen into the exact prejudiced, biased attitude I predicted. "The Arabs are all liars." Since you don't know anything about the spokesperson, you're basing your opinion solely on his status as a member of hezbollah, an org that holds seats in Parliament and has done a far better job than the government of protecting Lebanese citizens, and has helped poor people with schools, hospitals, poverty relief and social justice...just like Hamas. By doing this, you expose your bias against Arabs. You have no evidence and only one single biased here-say story yet you've declared Hezbollah guilty.

But this is of little relavence, since I've already pointed out that it doesn't really matter if the story is true or not, there's no comparison between the visciousness and immorality of Israel's conduct during the conflict and the conduct of Hezbollah, and the proof is in the numbers.

You cannot refute that, and that's why you haven't addressed my observations.
I guess people can decide who they want to believe.

No attempt at moral equivalency was made? That's as disingenuous as saying you aren't taking sides, something I saw you do when you responded to another post.
You can't fool me sir, nor can you fool the "people". It's frankly disrespectful to treat the readers as if they're stupid.

[oberliner]

13. The only one calling an Arab a liar is you

I thank you for posting the quote from the Hezbollah spokesman. People are certainly welcome to take him at his word.

The witnesses from Mghar whose testimony you dismiss as not reliable since they are "folks with an ax to grind" are Arabs.

Two civilians (including one 15-year old girl) were killed in that village by Hezbollah rockets.

I would be suspicious of a statement by a spokesman from Hezbollah and I would be suspicious of a statement by a spokesman from the IDF.

I would be more inclined to believe the two Arab gentlemen cited in the Human Rights Watch report, one of whom showed the pieces of submunitions and their casings to representatives from Human Rights Watch.

Why you are so dismissive of the eyewitness account provided to Human Rights Watch by two Arab men I have no idea.

[calzone]

15. Still spinning, huh?

You ignore the meat & potatoes of my points and dwell on the minutae, a more easily spun element. The witnesses were Arabs? The article you linked (and others) do not identify the ethnic origin of the witness and victims, so a source would be in order. But since they're Israeli citizens, my assertion that they have an axe to grind is probably accurate.
You can put words in my mouth, but that doesn't wash.
"I would be suspicious of a statement by a spokesman from the IDF."

We'll see. The history and nature of your posts suggest otherwise.

The pieces of submunitions were "shown" to members of HRW. That doesn't amount to compelling proof IMO. Let officials from the UN come in and do a detailed investigation. Then if they declare the story to be accurate I'll concede, but...ummm...given the history of the level of access afforded by the Israeli officials...that's unlikely to happen.

[oberliner]

19. source

Jihad Ghanem, a Palestinian factory manager residing in the Israeli village of Mghar, showed human rights investigators some of the 3.5mm steel spheres and shrapnel that injured his son Rami, 8, his brother Ziad, 35, and his sister Suha, 33, the group said. Rami's arms bore irregular scars and smaller round marks that Ghanem said were caused by steel spheres, the group said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/19/AR2006101901825.html?nav=emailpage

[calzone]

23. OK, you've shown that...

....the one witness, from one single unofficial source, was an Israeli-Arab. My points remain, he can be assumed to be biased. But if true, and there was one barrage of small cluster munitions, so what? What is the point of the original article, and why is it significant?
78 submunitions from 2 shells don't even begin to compare to 4,000,000, 90% of which was dropped in civilian areas on the last day.
It's like saying yeah, Frankenstein killed the little girl, but she tried to kick him on the shins while he was doing it.

[Shaktimaan]

17. I'll certainly make a statement as far as moral equivalency.

there's no comparison between the visciousness and immorality of Israel's conduct during the conflict and the conduct of Hezbollah, and the proof is in the numbers.

OK, so what you're saying is that because more people were killed in Lebanon that it is proof positive that Israel is the far more immoral of the two. So, for you, morality boils down to a simple fact of counting casualties and the side that killed more is the worse. The bigger the discrepency the more base the morals, right? Aspects such as motive, intent, any mitigating factors, goals, etc. have no bearing on morality, you managed to simplify it so that one can look at a single piece of the puzzle and learn who the bad guys are and who the good guys are.

This is a great system. Using it we can deduce that whichever side has a stronger army or the best defensive capabilities or the best evacuation procedure is the evil one. It's such a labor-saver! It takes all of the time consuming learning and accuracy out of forming solid, well reasoned thoughts on nebulous issues like "morality" and turns it into something that anyone with a second grade understanding of math (and reality) can do.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

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

[Shaktimaan]

10. What does he mean "our stance is consistent?"

Consistently in favor of targeting civilians? When has Hezbollah ever refrained from attacking cities or Kibbutzes? They even attacked Haifa which has a large Arab population.

In June 2002, , shortly after the Israeli government launched Operation Defensive Shield, Nasrallah gave a speech in which he defended and praised suicide bombings of Israeli civilians, including women and children; by members of Palestinian groups for "creating a deterrence and equalizing fear." Nasrallah stated that "in occupied Palestine there is no difference between a soldier and a civilian, for they are all invaders, occupiers and usurpers of the land."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah#Position_on_Jews_and_Judaism

And Reuters, HRW and the NYT have all reported on ball bearing packed rockets.

The most destructive was a single rocket packed with ball bearings that slammed into a parking lot at Kfar Giladi, a kibbutz in the northeastern panhandle, scoring a direct hit on Israeli reservists who were staying there. The rocket sprayed the bearings in a deadly cloud up to 60 yards in diameter, leaving a scene that witnesses, including a war-weary ambulance driver, described as the most horrific carnage they had ever seen.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/06/world/middleeast/06cnd-mideast.html?pagewanted=2&ei=5088&en=2d9cd76513ecb366&ex=1312516800&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

In addition, the warheads used suggest a desire to maximize harm to civilians. Some of the rockets launched against Haifa over the past two days contained hundreds of metal ball bearings that are of limited use against military targets but cause great harm to civilians and civilian property. The ball bearings lodge in the body and cause serious harm.

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/07/18/lebano13760.htm

This has nothing to do with Arabs being trustworthy or not. It has to do with whether Hezbollah officials are trustworthy or not. But nice attempt to play the race card there. Suuure. The whole conflict is because of American and European racism. Riiiight.

By the way, Hezbollah spokesperson. Not trustworthy.

[calzone]

14. Oh, but it is about prejudice and bias...

..against Arabs...In fact, the issue can't be defined in any other context.

shaktimaan wrote:
"Consistently in favor of targeting civilians? When has Hezbollah ever refrained from attacking cities or Kibbutzes? They even attacked Haifa which has a large Arab population."

You're putting words in the spokesperson's mouth, that's a strawman tactic, and boy is that a common practice among the Israel-firsters.
The spokesperson denied using cluster bombs.
You're alleged quote from Nasrallah is sourced at Wikipedia, but when I went to the source and actually read it, I curiously couldn't find the text you posted. What I DID find under some alleged quotes by Nasrallah was this:

"The managing editor of the Beirut Daily Star, which published the quotation, has however since called into question the accuracy of the quotation as well as the honesty of the reporter.<78> A search of the Daily Star's online archive shows that between August 2002 and November 2003, the newspaper published 170 reports by the journalist in question."

Interesting, huh? Furthermore, I found this at the same place...your source.

"Hezbollah has not been directly involved in a suicide bombing since 1999 and has publicly denounced some of these attacks. After the September 11, 2001 attacks, Hezbollah condemned Al Qaeda for targeting the civilian World Trade Center, but remained silent on the attack on the Pentagon, neither favoring nor opposing the act.<114><115> Hezbollah also denounced the Armed Islamic Group massacres in Algeria, Al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya attacks on tourists in Egypt,<116> and the murder of Nick Berg.<117> Nasrallah, in a 2006 interview with the Washington Post, condemned violence against American civilians: “f there are American tourists, or intellectuals, doctors, or professors who have nothing to do with this war, they are innocent, even though they are Americans, and it is forbidden."

I guess all this was an inadvertant ommision on your part.........huh?
Here's something I know because I've read Nasrallah's remarks over the years...he's offered an open-ended truce with Israel several times, and of course as usual Israel rebuffed him, apparently preferring to sacrificing more dead Israelis and slaughter more Pals in the sacred pursuit of zionism.

shaktimaan wrote:
"And Reuters, HRW and the NYT have all reported on ball bearing packed rockets."

What does this have to do with the thread? Ummm, artillery shells and rockets are designed to spray shrapnel, that's how they kill.
Are you kidding here? This has nothing to do with cluster bombs and chemical warfare. There is BTW an overwhelming bias in favor of Israel in the media, and reuters, the NYT, the LA Times, the WaHoPo and most other MSM are included, this is either out of deliberate editorial policy or fear of retribution. Challenge me to back this up. Go ahead.

"This has nothing to do with Arabs being trustworthy or not. It has to do with whether Hezbollah officials are trustworthy or not. But nice attempt to play the race card there. Suuure. The whole conflict is because of American and European racism. Riiiight.

By the way, Hezbollah spokesperson. Not trustworthy."

Like I said, it most certainly looks anti-Arab prejudice. To claim otherwise is suspect. It's an extension of the saying "Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslim." You operate under the presumption (prejudice) that Hezbollah is a terrorist group and the Israeli forces are not. The only force that protected the Lebanese civilians and stopped Israel from occupying Lebanon was Hezbollah. They are the legitimate defense force of Lebanon, as well as a part of the elected government.
But as I said, the issue of whether the Lebanese defense force (Hezbollah) used two small mortar-launched cluster bombs is irrelevant in the big picture. But I note that you use the tactic of diverting attention from the large, important issue and concentrate on minutae that's more easily spun.

[Shaktimaan]

16. Strawman tactics??? LOL.

You're putting words in the spokesperson's mouth, that's a strawman tactic, and boy is that a common practice among the Israel-firsters.
The spokesperson denied using cluster bombs.

According to you he gave the reason for not using cluster bombs as being "We reject the use of these bombs anywhere in the world because they hurt civilians, especially when dropped on residential areas." That means that he rejects the use of such weapons because their supposedly "unchanging stance" is to avoid hurting civilians. How is that putting words in his mouth? It is precisely what he said.

Challenging this statement is in no way racist. I am not basing my scepticism on anyone's race but on their actions. There is a long history of Hezbollah's disregard for any sort of behavior that would lessen civilian casualties. In fact, when it comes to Israel they do whatever they can to MAXIMIZE civilian casualties and freely admit it.

As far as the accuracy of my quotes goes, you pulled that caveat questioning the credibility of some text from a source that I didn't reference. My quote was footnoted as being from the NY Review of Books. It was located directly below the text that you saw fit to reference despite it being unrelated to the discussion. Your quote is specifically about Americans. Yet Nasrallah makes it clear that he has different standards depending on nationality. Here is my quote again...

Nasrallah stated that "in occupied Palestine there is no difference between a soldier and a civilian, for they are all invaders, occupiers and usurpers of the land."

So Hezbollah is against attacking civilians, but they have a unique definition of "civilian" that specifically excludes anyone who happens to be Israeli. Meaning, for non-Hezbollah members, they attack civilians. In fact, since they consider all Israelis to be soldiers they TARGET civilians.

What does this have to do with the thread? Ummm, artillery shells and rockets are designed to spray shrapnel, that's how they kill.

It has to do with the thread because you quoted Nasrallah as saying that they try and avoid hurting civilians, then implied that the only reason anyone finds him untrustworthy is because of his race. The bell bearing thing would not be anything special except he did not use them against military targets but specifically against civilians. The only reason to use weapons like that against a Kibbutz would be to try and kill as many non-combatants as possible. It is discrepencies like this that make him untrustworthy, not his race.

You operate under the presumption (prejudice) that Hezbollah is a terrorist group and the Israeli forces are not.

So when Hezbollah bombed the US Embassy in 1983 or the Argentine Israeli embassy in 1992 those are not examples of terrorism? How about support of Palestinian terror cells? Conversely, Israel does not purposefully target civilians and when they had to bomb civilian areas in Lebanon this past summer they dropped leaflets giving warning to allow for evacuation. Has Hezbollah ever done this? I don't seem to remember them warning anyone of their military targets to lessen casualties.

They are the legitimate defense force of Lebanon, as well as a part of the elected government.

Really? Because the Lebanese government, the UN, America and Israel don't consider them to be an official armed force of Lebanon. That's why Israel was criticised for retaliating so strongly, because they operate outside of the democratic government. The fact that they have ministers in the government is evidence that they are an illegitimate force as those ministers should be loyal to the government and abide by their decisions, not command their own military force and operate a shadow government in the south.

Here's something I know because I've read Nasrallah's remarks over the years...he's offered an open-ended truce with Israel several times, and of course as usual Israel rebuffed him, apparently preferring to sacrificing more dead Israelis and slaughter more Pals in the sacred pursuit of zionism.

Really? OK, link it up. Here's what I found by the way.

I am against any reconciliation with Israel. I do not even recognize the presence of a state that is called "Israel." I consider its presence both unjust and unlawful. That is why if Lebanon concludes a peace agreement with Israel and brings that accord to the Parliament our deputies will reject it; Hezbollah refuses any conciliation with Israel in principle.

Here's a dumb question. If Hezbollah is the legit defense force of Lebanon then why do they openly state that they won't abide by the decisions of the government? And if they want an open ended peace with Israel, then why do they call for its destruction in their charter?

I guess I'm just too predjudiced to look past the terrorism and anti-semitic statements and calls for Israel's destruction to see Nasrallah for the peace loving, warm hearted democrat that he insists he really is. I just can't picture it, y'know. I mean, after all... he's arab.

[calzone]

18. Your response doesn't reflect reality

"Challenging this statement is in no way racist. I am not basing my scepticism on anyone's race but on their actions. There is a long history of Hezbollah's disregard for any sort of behavior that would lessen civilian casualties. In fact, when it comes to Israel they do whatever they can to MAXIMIZE civilian casualties and freely admit it.

Challenging the statement is prejudiced and without merit. Your presumption about Hezbollahs' disregard for civilians isn't supported by the facts, so it looks to me like your basing your opinion on ethnicity. Methinks thou dost protest too much.

"As far as the accuracy of my quotes goes, you pulled that caveat questioning the credibility of some text from a source that I didn't reference. My quote was footnoted as being from the NY Review of Books. It was located directly below the text that you saw fit to reference despite it being unrelated to the discussion. Your quote is specifically about Americans. Yet Nasrallah makes it clear that he has different standards depending on nationality."

FALSE. And your post is right there for all to see. YOU REFERENCED WIKI, and the words you posted are not at the link. The NY review of books?! You did not ref that, and if you had, it would be just as laughable, since I can hold up something as fact because it's quoted in Mein Kampf, reviewed by the NY review. Where do you get the nonsense that the quote I refed is about Americans? Nasrallah makes no statement about differing civilians...I debunked that. Any more wiggling?

"It has to do with the thread because you quoted Nasrallah as saying that they try and avoid hurting civilians, then implied that the only reason anyone finds him untrustworthy is because of his race. The bell bearing thing would not be anything special except he did not use them against military targets but specifically against civilians. The only reason to use weapons like that against a Kibbutz would be to try and kill as many non-combatants as possible. It is discrepencies like this that make him untrustworthy, not his race."

FALSE: Again, you have no basis of fact for your presumption. If the account is true that Hezbollah targeted a Kibbutz, then right in the text YOU linked it says the rocket landed on reservists. MILITARY. In fact, the majority of the relatively few casualties from the Hezbollah Israeli/Lebanon conflict were military, while the overwhelming majority of the huge number of casualties by the Israeli forces were civilians.
And I called you on your apparent foolishness by trying to equate a common rocket with cluster bombs...that's B.S. buddy, and you can't get it past me.

"So when Hezbollah bombed the US Embassy in 1983 or the Argentine Israeli embassy in 1992 those are not examples of terrorism? How about support of Palestinian terror cells?"

I'm not concerned with what happened in 1983, or to Argentina's embassy. What embassy are you talking about BTW? We're talking about whether Hezbollah deliberately targets civilians today.

"Conversely, Israel does not purposefully target civilians and when they had to bomb civilian areas in Lebanon this past summer they dropped leaflets giving warning to allow for evacuation."

False: Israel on more than one occasion told the residents to flee, when they did, Israel attacked their cars and killed civilians en masse. This tactic was used many times. It was a ruse to get them all together and exposed on the roads. You need to get your facts striaght, it looks like you've been brainwashed. Don't you ever read anything besides israeli propaganda? You have a responsibility as a member of the world community to do some research and educate yourself. Unless of course you don't give a flying crap about the deliberate slaughter of women, children and old folks...indeed...entire families.

"Has Hezbollah ever done this? I don't seem to remember them warning anyone of their military targets to lessen casualties."

Obviously, if they don't target civilians, they don't need to WARN THEM. And why in the hell would anyone warn military targets? That would be pretty....well....stupid.

"Really? Because the Lebanese government, the UN, America and Israel don't consider them to be an official armed force of Lebanon. That's why Israel was criticised for retaliating so strongly, because they operate outside of the democratic government. The fact that they have ministers in the government is evidence that they are an illegitimate force as those ministers should be loyal to the government and abide by their decisions, not command their own military force and operate a shadow government in the south."

HuH? What you wrote above makes not the slightest nanometer of sense.
It's downright weird and delusional.

"I am against any reconciliation with Israel. I do not even recognize the presence of a state that is called "Israel." I consider its presence both unjust and unlawful. That is why if Lebanon concludes a peace agreement with Israel and brings that accord to the Parliament our deputies will reject it; Hezbollah refuses any conciliation with Israel in principle."

I don't see how this quote has anything to do with having offered a truce with Israel on several occasions. I'll see if I can find the link, to be proferred later. Not that you'll recognize or acknowlege it.

"Here's a dumb question. If Hezbollah is the legit defense force of Lebanon then why do they openly state that they won't abide by the decisions of the government? And if they want an open ended peace with Israel, then why do they call for its destruction in their charter?"

Well at least you realize that it's a dumb question. There is no exclusivity between being the legit defense force of lebanon and abiding by the decisions of the govt.., and BTW, that is an unsupported assertion. Hezbollah, in fact, is part of the govt..
You have a strange, blinkered way of interpreting things...there's also no contradiction between offering an extended truce and saying in one's charter that your goal is the ejection of the zionists from the post 1948 territories. In that charter, it also says the Jews would be allowed to exist freely and peacefully, under the jurisdiction of the Palestinians. You see? You're doing one helluva lot of SPINNING there Shak. Too bad for you I know the facts.

"I guess I'm just too predjudiced to look past the terrorism and anti-semitic statements and calls for Israel's destruction to see Nasrallah for the peace loving, warm hearted democrat that he insists he really is. I just can't picture it, y'know. I mean, after all... he's arab."

You're apparently too prejudiced to represent the facts as they actually are. What you've said above is simply not true. Once again, you construct strawmen by saying Nasrallah is a peaceloving warm-hearted dem. After 5 or 6 assasination attempts on my life by a rogue, morally bankrupt zionist regime, I would be hard put to offer a truce to the bastards. Nasrallah has showed unbelievable restraint in fact. You see? Your one way representation of the alleged facts does in fact suggest strongly...well...racism.

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

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

[calzone]

22. Your input is meaningless & undeserving of....

...respect, pelsar. You've already demonstrated your inability to admit when you've been proven wrong. You have no regard for honesty.

[calzone]

24. The backup I offered....

It directly refutes your unsourced, highly suspect quote.

Hezbollah's statement of purpose:
http://almashriq.hiof.no/lebanon/300/320/324/324.2/hizballah/statement01.html

Hezbollah's views and concepts:
http://almashriq.hiof.no/lebanon/300/320/324/324.2/hizballah/hizballah-background.html

Nothing in these about their goal being the "destruction of Israel", just like Iran's prez has never called for the destruction of Israel.

"several months prior to Israel's withdrawal from South Lebanon in May 2000, Nasrallah publicly announced, in a leading Arab magazine, that if Syria struck a deal with Israel which ensured a full Israeli withdrawal from all Lebanese territory, "Hizbullah would relocate in the South, but not have any form of security force, since it is a resistance movement whose goal is the liberation of land and not an alternative to the government." In a subsequent interview, Nasrallah added, "We are convinced that the signing of a peace agreement will be a victory for the resistance and the rationale of resistance."

Amid a general air of accommodation created by Mohammed Khatami's 1997 presidential win in Iran, the Culture and Islamic Guidance Minister Ayatollah Mohajerani had proclaimed in 1998 that, "if Israel withdraws from South Lebanon with guarantees for fixed and secure borders, there will be no further need for Hizbullah's resistance operation there." In an even more definitive statement in June 1999, Syria's ambassador to Washington, Walid al-Muoalim, made it clear that "Hizbullah's understands that every agreement accepted by Syria, Israel, and Lebanon will obligate it as well."

Israeli historians such as Tom Segev and Ilan Pappé were among the first "Westerners" to explode the myth that Israel wants peace but the Arabs keep rejecting it (Arab historians and scholars have been making that same point for much longer) with their studies of Israel's first years. They show how Ben-Gurion repeatedly refused final negotiations with his Arab neighbors, preferring a position of military domination.

The Arab League has repeatedly made offers to Israel of full normalization of relationship in return for a withdrawal to the 1967 borders."
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/08/10/the_story_of_hezbollahs_truce_with_israel.php

Hezbollah 'will observe UN truce'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4787179.stm

In addition to multiple attempts to murder him, Nasrallah's 18 yr old son was murdered by Israeli occupation forces.
The Israeli zionists hate him not because of any brutal tactics, but because his skilled leadership was responsible for defeating the occupation forces and scaring the Israelis out of Southern Lebanon in 2000, ending 22-years of occupation.

http://www.aljazeera.com/cgi-bin/review/people_full_story.asp?service_id=6849

The embassy attack in Argentina?

"its timing was intended to communicate to Israel that killing senior Hezbollah officials would result in the murder of Jews overseas. The embassy bombing was the first installment in a broader strategy of using terror attacks on Israeli and Jewish civilians to deter Israel from forceful action in Lebanon. It worked.

Hezbollah's Al-Manar television station (and Al-Nur radio station) regularly delivered the message that Hezbollah's war against Israel will end once the Israeli military left south Lebanon.

What is not commonly understood abroad is that the aim of the resistance in southern Lebanon is not military activity against northern Israel as carried on by the Palestinian guerillas of the 70's and early 80's, but the liberation of occupied Lebanon.

It (Hezbollah) runs a range of philanthropic and commercial activities including hospitals, medical centers,schools, orphanages, rehabilitation centers for the handicapped, supermarkets, gas stations, contructions companies, a radio station (Nur) and public service television station (Al Manar). Up until the middle 1990's Hizbullah was also responsible for public services and utilities in the southern suburbs of Beirut.'

http://almashriq.hiof.no/lebanon/300/320/324/324.2/hizballah/

[Englander]

27. One of these two things is not like the other.

Can you spot the difference?

Hezbollah’s deployment of the Chinese-made Type-81 122mm rocket is also the first confirmed use of this particular model of cluster munition anywhere in the world. Human Rights Watch documented two Type-81 cluster strikes that took place on July 25 in the Galilee village of Mghar.

>snip

Human Rights Watch has previously reported on Israel’s extensive use of cluster munitions in southern Lebanon during the conflict and has documented civilian casualties caused by these weapons both during the war and afterwards. The UN has estimated that Israel fired as many as 4 million submunitions into Lebanon, which left as many as 1 million hazardous unexploded “duds” still threatening Lebanese civilians and disrupting economic recovery from the war. These submunition duds have caused an average of nearly three civilian casualties a day since the cease-fire.

[calzone]

28. You'd think people would see this.

I can attribute it to nothing other than severe cognitive dissonance.
And the fact that anti-Israel reporting is strangled and avoided like the plaque in our MSM.

[oberliner]

29. Absolutely

Aren't you glad Hezbollah didn't have any more cluster bombs in their arsenal?

If they did, no doubt they would have killed more than 43 Israeli civilians.

According to Amnesty International:

"For more than four weeks, rockets launched by Hizbullah fell on northern Israel on a daily basis – usually more than 100 per day, as many as 240 one day towards the end of the hostilities. Many landed in heavily populated areas, damaging homes and killing and injuring civilians."

Seems clear from the Amnesty International Report that Hezbollah did what it could with its limited arsenal to inflict as much damage on civilians as possible.

From the same report:

"Those fired included rockets with warheads packed with thousands of metal ball bearings intended to maximize harm to people. Once the rockets struck, the ball bearings sprayed out, inflicting death and injury for 300 metres or more if in the open. Katyusha rockets cannot be aimed with accuracy, especially at long distances, and are therefore indiscriminate."

Excerpted from:

Israel/Lebanon
Under fire: Hizbullah’s attacks on northern Israel

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE020252006

[Englander]

30. Interesting response.

No wonder this place is shut off from the rest of DU, & with efforts like that one, I can fully
understand why that is. Comments about "being blinkered", or "cognitive dissonance" would be
superfluous at this point.

[oberliner]

31. Yours as well

It was my understanding that folks on DU are against the killing of civilians.

Not sure why it is such a challenge for people to agree with Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International that Hezbollah should be condemned for its actions during the conflict.

In addition to their extensive reports critical of Israel, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International both made a point of also producing reports that document Hezbollah's disregard for the safety of innocent people.

Of course Israel is, was, and should be condemned for its lack of regard for the safety of Lebanese civilians during the conflict.

That one cannot or will not also condemn Hezbollah for similarly having a lack of regard for the safety of Israeli civilians during the conflict seems somewhat odd.

What is the threshold number of Israeli civilians killed that has to be reached before it becomes worth mentioning?

[Englander]

32. Top quality framing.

Thanks for that, it's been quite a while since I've been accused of not caring about murdered
civilians, or of supporting terrorists, or other similarly baseless (& grotesque) accusations.
The framing presented makes as much sense as insinuating, or flat-out accusing, there's scarcely any
difference, that anyone who points out that the British military were fighting a dirty war in Ulster
in collusion with Loyalist paramilitaries are supporting the PIRA, or that anyone who points out
that the Chimp is a fascist is an anti-American, &tc, &tc, &tc.

I'm not terribly concerned about your "confusion" or "understanding" or what you consider "odd".
I've posted many, many, many, reports from HRW, ai, B'tselem &tc that call for respect for ihl &
the rights of civilians, & if you haven't noticed that then I can't help you.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=124&topic_id=163374#163750

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=124&topic_id=132663#132965

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=124&topic_id=128601#128763

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=124&topic_id=113620#114195

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=124&topic_id=161778#161922

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=124&topic_id=163491#163499

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=124&topic_id=151664

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=124&topic_id=148941#148963

[oberliner]

33. No framing

My only point is that, according to Human Rights Watch, Hezbollah also used cluster bombs.

It was in response to a post wondering what Israel would be saying if cluster bombs had hit them from Lebanon.

Cluster bombs did hit them from Lebanon, according to the Human Rights Watch report.

[breakaleg]

34. We've heard very large numbers of cluster bombs dropped by Israel.

And we've heard of the large number of civilian casualties that have occurred since the war ended.

I realize that cluster bombs used by anyone should be condemned. I'm not suggesting otherwise. Do you think the scale of cluster bombs used by each side to be comparable?

And if you are going to say that numbers don't matter I would say while all deaths are terrible, I think we should direct our criticism towards the party that committed the many, in larger doses to be in line with the crime.

[oberliner]

35. HRW and Amnesty International were critical of both parties

Some people would argue that the entire conflict could have been avoided if Hezbollah had not kidnapped those two Israeli soldiers.

But that's just right-wing lunatics like Russ Feingold who say things like that.

I think that criticism should be directed against Israel for its actions and I think that criticism should be directed against Hezbollah for its actions.

Israel and Hezbollah both share responsibility for all of the deaths that took place in that conflict.

[Tom Joad]

7. A War Crime. "Crazy and monstrous." These are more apt descriptions

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article1616665.ece

Entire villages were covered with these bomblets.


From link above:
Some Israeli officers are protesting at the use of cluster bombs, each containing 644 small but lethal bomblets, against civilian targets in Lebanon. A commander in the MLRS (multiple launch rocket systems) unit told the Israeli daily Haaretz that the army had fired 1,800 cluster rockets, spraying 1.2 million bomblets over houses and fields. "In Lebanon, we covered entire villages with cluster bombs," he said. "What we did there was crazy and monstrous." What makes the cluster bombs so dangerous is that 30 per cent of the bomblets do not detonate on impact. They can lie for years - often difficult to see because of their small size, on roofs, in gardens, in trees, beside roads or in rubbish - waiting to explode when disturbed.

[Violet_Crumble]

11. How does something like that happen without the knowledge of the chief-in-staff?

Who gave the order to use these weapons? And were they all dropped at once or was it over a period of time?

It's interesting though that Israel is now admitting it was a mistake to drop cluster bombs. I recall one poster in this forum actually defending Israel using them, so I'd be interested in seeing if their opinion on using them has now changed...

[Tom Joad]

21. Most of these weapons were dropped in the last 72 hours of the attack on Lebanon.

It was clearly a message to the people of Lebanon, an attack on civilians to force a political change.
It is so clearly a war crime that the US State Dept is forced to investigate.

I would say that the response from Hezbollah were also attacks on civilians to force political change too, its damage was much more limited, but there was true suffering among Israelis, especially Israeli Arabs because a) military installations tend to be built near Israeli Arab neighborhoods and b) lack of shelters for Israeli Arabs.

The US should immediately ban its weapons sales to both parties.

[Englander]

26. From ai;

Israel – USA: Ensure Israel hands over maps of cluster bombs strikes in South Lebanon

As the USA State Department raised concerns in its report to Congress about possible violations by Israel of a classified US-Israeli agreement on the use of cluster bombs, Amnesty International urged the Israeli government to hand over detailed maps and coordinates of the areas in south Lebanon into which its forces fired hundreds of thousands of cluster bombs during the 34-day conflict with Hizbullah last July-August.

Each day that Israel delays, more and more civilians’ lives are put at risk in south Lebanon. It is vital that detailed maps and all other information be made available urgently in order to reduce the risk both for the civilian population in the affected areas and for those carrying out the mine clearance operations.

In the past six months, accidents involving unexploded cluster bombs have caused more than 200 casualties, including several children, in and around villages in south Lebanon. Thirty people, eight of them de-mining personnel, have been killed and more than 180 people have been injured, including 20 mine clearers. Many of the injured have been maimed for life. Israel’s failure to provide maps or other information showing where its troops used cluster bombs has made the task of clearing unexploded munitions more dangerous and slower than it would otherwise be, putting both civilians and mine clearance personnel at greater and unnecessary risk.

The United Nation Mine Action Coordination Centre (UN-MACC) has identified more then 800 sites over which unexploded but still lethal remnants of cluster bombs and other ordnance are scattered and estimates that the clearing will take a year or more.

The Israeli authorities’ failure to provide detailed information regarding their use of cluster weapons in Lebanon becomes more inexcusable with each passing day. They should act immediately to ensure that all relevant information is made available to UN-MACC without further delay or prevarication.

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE150012007?open&of=ENG-2D2

Stop Cluster Munitions

http://www.stopclustermunitions.org/