chevaliers-de-sion
remember we only vist the museum you have to live there and can only visit US :lol: :lol: :lol: Ragoo
Corcovado
- chevaliers-de-sion wrote:
Ha-Ha you are so funny but then you do live in a living museum
:pukeleft: Nut case , Nut case :pukeright:
xibit
^^shrupp crazy fool
who gives a damn what others think
and yeah lolz quit the getho talk its not working on ur lame life.
chevaliers-de-sion
Ha-Ha you are so funny but then you do live in a living museum
xibit
^^ crazy fool
and ppl like u would still be living in concentration camps if it was not for the US/Westerners
chevaliers-de-sion
[quote="sniper420"][quote="kanelli"]There are some Arabs/Muslims who think that their cultures and religion are superior to everyone else's.
Chocoholic
And what about Hezbollah also leaving other people aline - it cuts both ways.
valkyrie
I do
the third option was: No, Hizbollah are fighting off the baby killers and defending the Lebanese people, but what's their position on stem cell research?
Lionheart
Ho can one not support a resistance fighting against modern day Nazis=the Zoinist in Isreal.
THe British Politian Galloway said it best...Do not be Husni Mubarak, do not be Abdullah, do not be the belly dancing Arab leaders" :lol: :lol: that is classic and true.
yshimy
Man,
I don't understand "all the way" one... please explain
1 Dubai Jobs .com The First Place to Find a Job in Dubai
valkyrie
Man,
I don't understand "all the way" one... please explain
I mean if you support Hizb Allah unconditionally and uncritically. My support for Hizb Allah ends as soon as the zionists leave Lebanon. I also don't condone their practice of firing rockets into Israel.
Ho can one not support a resistance fighting against modern day Nazis=the Zoinist in Isreal.
Good point. What Usrael is doing in Lebanon and Palestine is reminiscent of the Nazis. I fully support legitimate resistance aganist occupation soldiers, many liberals in the west however regularly chime in that Hizbollah is reactionary but they are the only ones who fighting against baby killers. Massacres are being committed in Lebanon, so now is not the time to sit back decide to support them. Liberals will have to get their hands dirty when they take a side, but it is not the time withhold solidarity for Lebanon, you can do that when the conflict is over.
Chocoholic
V, If you're going to do polls such as this, it's only fair to add negative responses as well. You don't give any choice, therefore unfair, biased poll!
ajb
- Chocoholic wrote:
V, If you're going to do polls such as this, it's only fair to add negative responses as well. You don't give any choice, therefore unfair, biased poll!
Was thinking the same thing ... extremely pointless having a poll which only has one answer :roll:
kanelli
No, I don't support Hezbollah. I believe that Lebanon should have one army that represents the interest of the people through their elected government. Hezbollah should be disarmed and the Lebanese army should step in to protect the country.
freza
:lol:
The Lebanese army is a joke!! If it wasn't for Hezbollah, parts of Lebanon would be annexed and Israeli-occupied by now.
ajb
- freza wrote:
:lol:
The Lebanese army is a joke!! If it wasn't for Hezbollah, parts of Lebanon would be annexed and Israeli-occupied by now.
Parts of Lebanon ARE Israeli occupied at the moment ... Hezbollah or not
I agree with K on the Lebanese army being the sole armed force in Lebanon.
KeithL
I dont believe in supporting any groups that perpetuate violence.
An eye for an eye attitude will only result in the whole world turning blind
Chocoholic
Good one Keith.
freza
Hezbollah does not perpetuate violence, their militia perpetuates
defence .
The Lebanese people are the ones that should decide what is good for their country or not.
arniegang
In the interest of this being a balanced poll i have added a third option.
kanelli
So, when Hezbollah bombed the US army barracks in Beirut in the early 80's, that was defence was it?
Also, did the Lebanese government (which represents the Lebanese people) order Hezbollah to protect Lebanon by going across the border and killing and kidnapping Israeli soldiers?
uae75
- kanelli wrote:
So, when Hezbollah bombed the US army barracks in Beirut in the early 80's, that was defence was it?
Also, did the Lebanese government (which represents the Lebanese people) order Hezbollah to protect Lebanon by going across the border and killing and kidnapping Israeli soldiers?
The question that should be asked, is why are the americans on Lebanese soil? I dont think the americans would like to have one single soldier on their soil! So yes, this is called defence!
In regards to the second part, I do suggest you check this interview with George Galloway on Sky News.
,,31200-galloway_060806,00.html
yshimy
- kanelli wrote:
No, I don't support Hezbollah. I believe that Lebanon should have one army that represents the interest of the people through their elected government. Hezbollah should be disarmed and the Lebanese army should step in to protect the country.
I disagree.. but respect your opinion.
Organized army will be very limited in its moves and every step will be monitored by Israel which will give alot of advantage.
Hizbollah, is a resistance force and not an army, they do the streets war or "gang war". they are more free, more flexible in movment, and they are more effective in the war against a wealthy country like Israel which is technologically advanced and more powerful due to their big daddys support.
Both models are required, both have their effectivness and their goals.
I remember during Octover war against Egypt "Youm Kappor" in which each force got its effectivness on different grounds.
I support Hizbollah, especially because they are true fighters for freedom.
kanelli
yshimy, they are true fighters of freedom only for their group. From what I have read, Hezbollah hasn't had huge support of the Lebanese people until this current attack from Israel.
A Lebanese army allows combat between soldiers, not guerrilla fighters hiding amongst the citizens and drawing fire onto them. Hezbollah is causing more civilan deaths than the Lebanese army would draw if engaging the Israelis.
A Lebanese army should be acting according to government's wishes, unlike Hezbollah, which functions according to its own group wishes. The Lebanese people deserve their own government with their own army - not a separate group trying to make themselves into an army. Other countries would be willing to negotiate with Lebanon who would have control over their own army - they are not willing to negotiate with Hezbollah.
I am thinking about peace, not groups trying to wipe each other off the map.
valkyrie
I didn't intend the poll to have only two options.
Kanelli
"A Lebanese army allows combat between soldiers, not guerrilla fighters hiding amongst the citizens and drawing fire onto them. Hezbollah is causing more civilan deaths than the Lebanese army would draw if engaging the Israelis. "
Hizbollah doesn't use human shields. If the Lebanese army fought against Israel they would be crushed. Hezbollah has been able to do what the amries of 3 arab countries were unable to accomplish, stop the IOF in their tracks.
kanelli
- valkyrie wrote:
I didn't intend the poll to have only two options.
Kanelli
"A Lebanese army allows combat between soldiers, not guerrilla fighters hiding amongst the citizens and drawing fire onto them. Hezbollah is causing more civilan deaths than the Lebanese army would draw if engaging the Israelis. "
Hizbollah doesn't use human shields. If the Lebanese army fought against Israel they would be crushed. Hezbollah has been able to do what the amries of 3 arab countries were unable to accomplish, stop the IOF in their tracks.
Count the dead on the Lebanese side compared to the Israeli side. Then come back and argue with me.
yshimy
- kanelli wrote:
- valkyrie wrote:
I didn't intend the poll to have only two options.
Kanelli
"A Lebanese army allows combat between soldiers, not guerrilla fighters hiding amongst the citizens and drawing fire onto them. Hezbollah is causing more civilan deaths than the Lebanese army would draw if engaging the Israelis. "
Hizbollah doesn't use human shields. If the Lebanese army fought against Israel they would be crushed. Hezbollah has been able to do what the amries of 3 arab countries were unable to accomplish, stop the IOF in their tracks.
Count the dead on the Lebanese side compared to the Israeli side. Then come back and argue with me.
not supporting any view here, but had to respond...
Count the people who are willing to die for their land in Lebanon compared to the Israeli side. Then go talk to each other.
I might be willing to loose my life defending my mother, while the agressor wouldn't be willing to loose a finger ;)
chevaliers-de-sion
Yes all the way
45%
45% [ 9 ] very nice to see only 9 Freaks/losers/sasuage jockeys
and valkyrie the loser
kanelli
yshimy, are you saying that all those Lebanese civilians who died gave up their lives willingly in this conflict? Hezbollah fights from amongst the civilian population and draws fire onto them.
uae75
Kanelli,
It means that all Lebanese civilians were backing Hezbollah despite the fact that almost half of the lebanese were disliking hezbollah before all this happened.....From what I saw in TV and from what I heard from LEbanese friends, who came from Lebanon just few days ago, everyone there are happy that hezbollah is fighting on their behalf.
Its unfortunate that many have died in this dirty war, but this is the business of war, usually lots of civilians gets killed in it whether we like or not, whether we accept it or not. This might sound harsh, but its the unfortunate reality. :(
kanelli
And you don't think the Lebanese people would have been happy if their own national army was fighting the Israelis? I suspect they would.
uae75
Actually, if the lebanese army were fighting, it would have been a major military mistake. The lebanese army knew that, and thats why they were supporting the hezbollah, without actually being part of the war.
Ofcourse, lebanese people would have prefered if their army joined the war, but its not what the lebanese like or dislike. In such situations, Lebanese Military army should weigh things and decide how to play a role in such war, without conflicting heavy casualities, cuz they are no match to the israeli army.
kanelli
But I think that if at least some of those innocent civilian lives could have been saved, it would have been worth it to have military vs. military fighting - not Israeli military vs. guerrilla group hiding amongst civilians. I am very angry that so many civilians were killed.
MaaaD
I am with hezbollah all the way. They have been very brave defending Lebanon against the Israeli agression over the years, and balancing the power in a region that has not had balance in a long time. A very small brave group of men with very strong principles. They have restored pride and dignity to those who support them.
Israel will think a million times now before attacking Lebanon, Syria or Iran.
For all the peace doves, there cant be peace if there isnt any balance of power. Only then can you have negotiations, and a just peace between the sides. So anyone who wants a stable middle east should be happy to see the emergence of a power that can rival the Israeli killing machine.
sniper420
- MaaaD wrote:
I am with hezbollah all the way. They have been very brave defending Lebanon against the Israeli agression over the years, and balancing the power in a region that has not had balance in a long time. A very small brave group of men with very strong principles. They have restored pride and dignity to those who support them.
Israel will think a million times now before attacking Lebanon, Syria or Iran.
For all the peace doves, there cant be peace if there isnt any balance of power. Only then can you have negotiations, and a just peace between the sides. So anyone who wants a stable middle east should be happy to see the emergence of a power that can rival the Israeli killing machine.
no isreal wont think million times they are buying bunker busterable to penetrate 40 + m and I guess will buy bomber planes thus next time they will follow the "shock and awe" policy of states and change their tactical command.
zam
Totally agree with Keith. :wink:
chevaliers-de-sion
How sad... In the News today reports...that UN officials acknowledge there are as yet no firm pledges of troops from any countries,
Despite American calls for a rapid deployment.
Fear is, if there is further delay, it will put pressure on an already fragile ceasefire and increase the risks of the whole operation,
It also in report it read that it is hoped troops from Islamic countries will join them later.............................why is this?
Chocoholic
Because it would keep the balance.
chevaliers-de-sion
- Chocoholic wrote:
Because it would keep the balance.
A very strange balance when it is "hoped" troops from Islamic countries will join them later..............
Chocoholic
No the point is, if you just have western peace keeping troops or whatever, then you always get some sort of animosity towards them - just look at Iraq! Afghanistan etc. So to have troops from Islamic coutries working side by side with them the better the country, you'd stop that problem from occuring.
Ideally there should ONLY be peace keeping troops from Islamic countries.
Stormy
I will support them as along as Israil don't want to leave them alone !
KeithL
- freza wrote:
Hezbollah does not perpetuate violence, their militia perpetuates defence .
The Lebanese people are the ones that should decide what is good for their country or not.
you mean - the best defence is offence ?? :?:
as i said earlier, an eye for an eye will only result in the whole world turning blind
uae75
- KeithL wrote:
- freza wrote:
Hezbollah does not perpetuate violence, their militia perpetuates defence .
The Lebanese people are the ones that should decide what is good for their country or not.
you mean - the best defence is offence ?? :?:
as i said earlier, an eye for an eye will only result in the whole world turning blind
Lets not debate in the arts of war and the best way to beat an enemy lol........although in many cases, the best defence is offence :wink:
PhDFares
it is amazing to see what POLL survey has resulted in!
44% support Hizbullah all way
44% Do not All way
ONLY 11% support on condition that Zionist still occupying land!
even though I go with 11% but see those 44% assemble problem here, perhaps extemist from each side, in DF!
take me not seriously am just wondering :roll:
sniper420
- Chocoholic wrote:
No the point is, if you just have western peace keeping troops or whatever, then you always get some sort of animosity towards them - just look at Iraq! Afghanistan etc. So to have troops from Islamic coutries working side by side with them the better the country, you'd stop that problem from occuring.
Ideally there should ONLY be peace keeping troops from Islamic countries.
why from islamic countries?they didnt create th problem.
and isreal wouldnt agree
valkyrie
No the point is, if you just have western peace keeping troops or whatever, then you always get some sort of animosity towards them - just look at Iraq! Afghanistan etc. So to have troops from Islamic coutries working side by side with them the better the country, you'd stop that problem from occuring.
Ideally there should ONLY be peace keeping troops from Islamic countries.
Iraqis and Afghans don't hate the Americans because they are westerners, they hate the Americans because they are occupying their country. The French resistance was just as contemptous to German occupiers as Middle Easterners are loathe occupation soldiers who happen to be western.
kanelli
There are some Arabs/Muslims who think that their cultures and religion are superior to everyone else's. In particular, the West is looked at as being rotten and immoral because of the more liberal attitude and cultural practices. Religion is separated from the state, which is seen as a weakness.
On the other hand you also have some Westerners who think their culture and religion is superior. They believe the stereotypes about Islam instead of actually talking to people and learning more.
So, basically you have a clash of cultures - each thinking they are superior to the other. More understanding and lessing judging would be useful, but it doesn't seem to be happening with some people.
sniper420
- kanelli wrote:
There are some Arabs/Muslims who think that their cultures and religion are superior to everyone else's. In particular, the West is looked at as being rotten and immoral because of the more liberal attitude and cultural practices. Religion is separated from the state, which is seen as a weakness.
On the other hand you also have some Westerners who think their culture and religion is superior. They believe the stereotypes about Islam instead of actually talking to people and learning more.
So, basically you have a clash of cultures - each thinking they are superior to the other. More understanding and lessing judging would be useful, but it doesn't seem to be happening with some people.
what's so sad with technological advancement the world has bcome small place but wider in understanding each other