It is true that the war on drugs has not been going well when the religious fanatics lost power. So what?

And what's wrong about being an opportunistic warlord if one's rule is actually better than the alternative?

911 might have had something to do with them becoming the bad guys. Had you even heard of the Taliban before 911?

But Germany was still murdering people.

Why do you tell me things as if you have seen them? My parents actually HAVE seen them and told me. My father grew up during the war.

Who told you?

Yup! There was a newspaper article detailing how they'd been running around the countryside blowing up budhist statues!

By no means am I saying that they were good guys or any such nonsense. I'm saying the ones who've replaced them are little better. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

Oh come on. Using the "I've been there and know people!!" argument. Just kidding, yes that is legitimate.

Well, the person who told me the most regarding Dresden was Kurt Vonnegut. In fact, dozens of different pieces he's written over the years detail quite well his experiences there and during the war in general. I highly recommend you read them if you haven't already. Slaughterhouse 5 is a good read but it's a science fictiony- way of trying to tell his story. He has more meatier pieces that are far more detailed.

But admittedly, first hand info is always different depending on who you talk to. You've detailed your experiences in Haifa while under rocket attack, for which you are indeed a brave fellow in choosing to stay. On the flipside, I have friends who come from Lebanon who detailed to me their perspective during the bombing, which was, how shall we say, very different from yours. They tell a story of damned if you do, damned if you don't, yes there were leaflets dropped warning people to leave, but then the IDF was also dropping a lot of ordinance on major roads and bridges, and the airport was shut down too. So, stay at home and risk being killed by an accidental bomb, or leave and risk being killed on the road? You saw the IDF as the good guys defending you (I'm assuming) whereas the folks I know saw them as the bad guys.

Anywho. If I believe your testimony, terrorists in Lebanon were bombing the crap out of Israel and the IDF was just doing the humane thing to protect it's citizens. If I believe the people I know on the other side of the border, it was the other way around with Israel carrying out a war of aggression while H-bola was just defending itself. So who do I listen to???

Just FYI, I am part German myself. My mother's side of the family left Germany early after the turn of the 20th century. They saw the way things were going with the arms buildup and didn't want to get conscripted into the Kaiser's army, so they came to Canada and thrived as farmers. But the whole family didn't go, as is usual, some of them stayed behind in Germany. So that is one source of information.

And, going with the differences one can find in first-hand information my co-worker can be used as a good example. His family comes from Germany too, his father and mother immigrated to Canada after WW2. His father was in the German army during the war, however he was stationed as border patrol with Switzerland. So, going from his testimony, WW2 was the most boring war of all time because all he did was sit in a tank that never had any fuel to go anywhere anyway!

Staying would have been stupid. Israel evacuated its citizens and we were hoping Hizbullah or the Lebanese government would do the same in Lebanon.

We didn't want the war.

I was also in Iraq a few weeks ago.

It must have been. They didn't evacuate.

Except the IDF bombed all those things AFTER the leaflets were dropped. On our side the rockets came without warning.

And that's the difference. They started it, and we even warned them before we shot back. Why did they start it? Ask them.

Don't you think it's a bit cocky to attack someone and then complain that he defends himself, especially when he warns you before he does and gives you a chance to run away?

Why don't you think about it?

Israel wasn't carrying out a war of aggression. You know that. The Lebanese were not surprised by Israel shooting back. It had been _five years_, afterall. Five years of rocket attacks.

If you really want to know, I suggest you try it out.

Dress up as a Lebanese and walk through an Israeli city. Then dress up as an Israeli and walk through a Lebanese city. You will find out who attacks whom.

I can tell you that Israelis have no problems with the existence of Lebanese. There are even Lebanese restaurants in Haifa. (A few ten thousand Lebanese Christians live in Israel.)

Ask your Lebanese friends why they lie to you.

The leaflets were dropped BEFORE the bombing started. It was IMPOSSIBLE for them to want to leave and not be able to because of what the IDF did. It's a lie.

You know what I really hate about people like you, Artysim?

It's not even the lies you tell about Jews or Israel. It's that attitude that if somebody kills Jews, even if he announces his wish to do so before he does, SOMEHOW the Jews must be the bad guys or at least equally at fault.

Why don't you ask an IDF officer whether he hates Lebanon? And why don't you ask a Hizbullah "officer" if he hates Israel? You might just find out which organisation is the problem here.

And, incidentally, using human shields is a war crime. Shooting at an enemy who uses human shields is not (even if the human shield die).

But guess what made the UN decide what was a war crime? The text of the law or the ethnicity of the perpetrator? Take a guess.

And see if you can find anybody from the other side who will tell you that they hoped Israel would evacuate the area. What would be the point of shelling northern Israel if there were no Jews there?

It is the age old retarded argument "it takes two to have a conflict" (assuming it isn't blatent anti semitism)... Which is bullshit. If it takes two for every conflict then things like "murder" "rape" and "aggrevated assult" would not be illigal, because both parties would always be equally to blame. Would you come to the family of the victims of the columbine shooting and tell them "it takes two to have a conflict, so your child was equally at fault"? would you say that to the victim of battery or rape?

The only, THIN, argument you (not you leuki) have is that the non involved "innocent civilians" used as human shields were cought in a crossfire... but any human shield that defends the person who used them as a sheild, and renounces the person who fires at them in self defense, DESERVES what they get.

I can assure you, if someone used me as a human shield I would blame him, not whomever he was using me to shield himself from.

If I give you a LOT of credit I would blame holliwood instead of your blatent stupidity or bigotry. In holliwood the evil villian grabs an inncent civilian as a human shield and fires at the dashing hero, the hero dodges his bullets and nails him right between the eyes without hurting the hostage... In reality that does not work that way. The hero often times gets hit and killed, then another hero shoots at the baddie and hits the hostage by accident killing both of them... and then idiots like you blame the heroes instead of the villian who took the hostage.

Speaking of what the "people from lebanon" told you... there is wide spread bigotry in lebanon. You go back in time 150 years and you ask the average white person in the USA what they think about slave uprising, slaves running away, and anti slavery organizations. They will have some very harsh things to say, and they will excuse the practice with explanations about how black people are incapable of governing themselves, so slavery actually helps them...

The point of talking to someone who personally saw the conflict is to understand what happens better, not to take their prejidiced VIEWPOINTS as fact. their opinions are just that, OPINIONS. You need to form logicial coherant conclusions based on their TESTIMONY. (it is israel's fault is not a testimony, it is an opinion. A testimony would be if you asked them how many hours it took between seeing a leaflet warning to evacuate, and seeing the first bomb hit.)

Yes.

In my experience it takes only one to have a conflict. But it takes two to resolve it.

Of course you didn't. But you knew it would happen and planned for it way in advance just 'cause, right? Nasrallah was very clear on what he would do if negotiations broke down. Those negotiations did break down, so he did exactly what he said he would. Then Israel launched an all out air campaign followed up by a ground invasion, which by the way was a war that Israel had prepared for months in advance and lost anyway.

Again with the hate. For the record, your feelings are entirely one way. I harbor no resentment towards you or "people like you" whatever that may mean.

Now hold on one second buster. I've never talked or expressed any single opinion about Jews. The state of Israel, yes, I have expressed opinions on but I do not equate the nation state of Israel with Jews. That would be kinda like equating all Anglicans to England I guess.

All I've expressed is the opinion that Israel has used some pretty hard-handed tactics that have resulted in far more damage and casualties to civillians than it did against their actual enemies. If you feel that opinion is somehow anti-semitic and that Israel should have the right to kill as many civillians as they would like with no scrutiny or questions asked, then I am sorry you feel that way.

Again, let's look at the numbers. Lebanon has what, just over 4 million people living there (4.5??) and Hezbollah by their own admission had no more than maybe 5000 fighters in the south. The bulk of the rocket launch sites were definitely not in south beirut, although countless buildings and houses were levelled there because they were possible "terrorist hideouts"

The truth is, again, that the IDF had no freaking clue where Hezbollah was so they bombed neighbourhoods and civillian areas that had any kind of perceived affiliation to it. Considering that Hezbollah is only a few thousand people out of a population of millions that's an awful lot of suffering to spread around on the off chance you might take out a couple of guys. And again, it didn't succeed in hurting hezbollah's operations significantly. Rhetoric aside the IDF's tactics didn't work and backfired on them big time. Hezbollah came out stronger from the conflict and is still a viable force.

Therefore, the opinion I'm expressing is not anti-Israeli. The viewpoint I'm trying to put forward is that strategically, Israel made a big mistake that hurt them and will have lasting rammifications for quite some time. But you seem to equate any criticism, of any kind, as anti-semitic.

So in your opinion Israel shouldn't be ready to defend herself?

And what "negotiations"? There were no negotiations with Hizbullah. Maybe you are not aware of who or what Hizbullah are?

Hizbullah shelled northern Israel for FIVE YEARS (I believe that's what you call "negotiations") before the war "started" (I believe you would say the war "started" when Israel started shooting back).

That's very noble of you. Instead of hating people you merely repeat stories that, when believed by the right people, and they are, get people killed.

How very noble of you not to hate.

I'll continue to hate you and people like you, because I am less noble. But my opinion about you and people like you will not cause me to make up stories about you when I know that there are people out there who would kill you because they believe them.

Perhaps that is the difference between a noble liberal (who doesn't hate) and a hateful conservative? Is that why you guys make fun of morals?

So perhaps my feelings are one way and your resentment s based entirely on boredom or whatever it is that makes liberals tell lies about Israel. It has NOTHING to do with justice when a random Muslim, who has been told the lies you among others tell kills a Jew and believes he goes to heaven for it. So perhaps it is boredom. It is not "justice" what you are doing.

I was hoping it would be hatred.

I can understand the Arab who believes he was wronged by Jews (because some revisionist told him) and who hates Israel and trying to kill Jews. I can understand that and I have met individuals who once held such opinions. And when they find out the truth, when they meet Jews or Israelis, when they find other news sources (luckily there are some people in the west who do not tell them the lies you tell), they change. That's because hate is not the end. Indifference and arrogance are.

But the unemotional European or American, who has no experiences with Israel either way, repeating the same stupid lies, not out of hatred for Jews or Israel, but for boredom or whatever your motivation is, that's really a problem we cannot solve. You guys we have to wait out. No peace initiative will get rid of you guys.

Well, YOU might not equate the nation state of Israel with Jews, but Jews do, Israelis do, and Israel's enemies do. And even if Israel and Jews had nothing to do with each other, it would still be wrong to tell lies about Israel.

It's not the "about Jews" that's the problem, it's the lies. If a Bedouin or Druze dies because some idiot who believes the stories you and others tell about Israel attacked them in their villages (and Hizbullah did), I will be just as angry at you and you will be just as indifferent because you, obviously, don't "hate" Bedouins or Druzim.

To make it perfectly clear: You have told lies about Israel. And people die because others believe those lies. It has nothing to do with the lies being about Jews or Israel being a Jewish state as such. It has everything to do with the fact that you tell lies about a country you don't even know; and you don't even feel hatred for the country or its people, as you say, you just tell the lies anyway and probably don't even care about the results.

That's another lie you tell. I have seen videos of Hizbullah shooting rockets from behind apartment buildings and IDF rockets flying towards the source (hitting the apartment building as Hizbullah were hiding behind it).

The IDF knew where Hizbullah were. Hizbullah were in civilian areas. That's how the neighbourhoods got bombed.

But I assume it's not anti-Semitic when you make a war crime committed by Hizbullah (hiding among civilians while shooting) into a story of Israel spreading "suffering".

It's only a war crime if not committed against Jews, isn't it? (Sorry, _against Israel_. As you say, it has nothing to do with Israel being Jewish. I am sure you regularly verbally attack lots of other countries for shooting back at war criminals who hide among civilians and blame the country for the suffering caused.)

http://www.cracked.com/article_16704_p2.html

skip to the middle of the page... to #2... "Hamas' Mickey Mouse and Bugs Bunny Tomorrow's Pioneers (TV, 2007-2008)" where it shows some clips from a popular CHILDRENS SHOW in some of those "enlightened" arab countries. This is just one of MANY that I have seen, all equally horrible... (there is the one with the suicide bomber, and there is that soap opera where the jewish doctors STEAL THE EYES of a beutiful palastinian girls to implant in the empty sockets of some rich israeli who does not deserve them... because jews can do eye transplants...)

There has never been a show like that in israel, europe (aside from nazi germany), or the USA... heck the shows from communist russia and china were not even CLOSE to this bad (yea they were propaganda, but not to this level).

I suggest watching some foreign culture, it will help you get a perspective about things.

I agree that Israel made strategic mistakes.

But I do not agree that it is therefore OK to tell lies about what Israel did.

For the record, I do not equate any criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism (I myself have heavily criticised Israel's treatment of Darfurian refugees), I merely equate such criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism that is made up of lies (that are less likely to be told or believed about other countries).

Criticise Israel for something Israel has done (or not done enough of), and we are fine.

Make up or repeat stupid lies and criticise Israel based on those, and we are not.

Make it clear that you make up or repeat such lies primarily about Israel, and anti-Semitism is a probable motivation.

And if you are not an anti-Semite, just stop worrying about Israel's many crimes. There are enough evil people in the world you can talk about where such talk does not cause murder and wars when the lies are believed, and where the actual crimes are not limited to violence that causes only a few thousand deaths in several decades.

May I direct your attention at Sudan?

In contrast to the poor people in Gaza, the Darfurians do not have well-stocked supermarkets and enough money to buy the Sinai empty whenever Egypt opens the border to them.

Sure, their oppressors are not Jews or Israel, and I don't know your motivation for targeting Israel with your "criticism", so perhaps there is nothing in it for you. But at least you won't need to resort to (or believe) lies, because the Sudanese government have done almost every bad thing that can be done.

People from Darfur FLEE trough Egypt to Israel, DESPITE the stories they were told about evil Israel, by people like you from the west and Arab nationalists in the Arab world, DESPITE "knowing" about Israel what you "know", DESPITE Israel being "known" for randomly attacking civilian villages in other countries for no reason (and spreading suffering, of course), DESPITE all that Darfurians pay thousands of dollars to Egyptian Bedouins and try to make their way to Israel, even though the Egyptian border police try to kill them on the road.

They are black Muslims fleeing their homes and travelling for 2000 miles to find refuge in an Israeli prison.

And few people even know about their plight because some Arab child died in Israel or Lebanon last week and we might be able to blame Israel for it.

delete

New words added (one modified):

Sources: A Wikipedia article on Syria (Hizbullah is a "resistance group" engaged in "resistance"). The IDF is not referred to as a "resistance group".

Okay, fine fine. I'm a noble liberal who tells lies and is condescending and doesn't understand the world. That's fine. And you are.... whatever you choose to be. And that's fine too.

Well, you see I didn't "make up" any of this. I happen to know people who come from the other side of the borders, people who used to live in the "occupied" territories, or whatever you want to call them. They grew up seeing firsthand the benevolence of the IDF, and after years of checkpoints and raids and "collateral" damage they left, essentially as refugees.

Could it just be that all of them, despite many of them never having met each other, all tell me the same lies? That must be a pretty good propaganda arm spreading the same story amongst different populations that are dissimilar.

Now, these are "lies" that are told by amnesty international, a group that's had a pretty good track record in the past of sniffing out abuses.

These are "lies" told by Jimmy Carter, a U.S president who committed the crime of not bombing the hell out of some poor backward country and so has had every problem in the last 30 years attempted to be pinned on him

That's really up to you. I didn't ask you to tell lies. In fact I would be glad if you stopped.

That's all very well, but your lies were not about checkpoints and raids. Is your point that it is OK to tell lies if exist other stories that might be true?

AI is not above lying either. But that's not the point here either. The lies you told are not stories fabricated or honestly reported by AI. You are changing the subject to your statements about the Lebanon war to other things Israel did. I am sure you have lots of "facts" about those other things as well.

And I assume you have already ruled out the possibility that there is some pretty good propaganda out there?

I know lots of people who never met each other but are convinced that Israel attacked Lebanon in 2006 and that Hizbullah merely defended the country. That was what many Arab (and western) television stations reported.

Jimmy Carter is a man who took credit for Anwar Sadat's work and publicly associates with his murderers (the "Muslim" Brotherhood and their subsection Hamas). How much respect do you think I should have for a man who takes credit for another man's work and then makes friends with that man's murderers?