Israeli Attack on Lebanon

[Varouj]

Christian shrine destroyed in southern Lebanon

In a separate development, an ancient Christian shrine was destroyed as a result of Wednesday’s Israeli raids on southern Lebanon. According to archimandrite Sergius in the town of Deir Mimas, an Israeli missile flattened the St. Mamant of Caesarea church, one of the oldest in the Middle East built where the Christian martyr died in the 3rd century AD. The temple was fully restored last year.

03.08.2006

http://www.vor.ru/index_eng.phtml?view=east_eng&id=138

[Tursian]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogiSMfjOrk0

[Hovik]

Turkey votes to send troops to Lebanon

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060905/ap_on_re_mi_ea/mideast_turkey_1

[Gondorian]

Since this thread has so far been totally one sided.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...311756,00.html

If this was a defeat, the Israelis must be praying for a lot more of them
Tim Hames

IF ONLY Israel were as effective at public relations as at military operations, the results of the conflict on and around its border with Lebanon would be so much starker. As it is, however, the real meaning of the UN resolution that will start to come into force today is being widely misrepresented. Hezbollah is hailing a “victory” of sorts, albeit one of a presentational character. In a bizarre situation, Israeli politicians on both the hard Left and the hard Right appear to agree with the terrorists. All are profoundly mistaken.
What, after all, does this Hezbollah claim consist of? The organisation considers it a triumph that it has not been completely “destroyed” after just four weeks of fighting. It contrasts this with the dismal record of several Arab armies combined in 1967. It has not yet been disarmed and may not be formally neutralised in the near future. Nor has it been discredited on the Arab street, where it has enhanced its popularity. The Hezbollah leader, Sheikh Hassan Nasrullah, thus proclaims himself a “new Nasser”.



As victories rank, not being destroyed, disarmed or discredited is not that impressive. It is hardly Henry V at Agincourt. The idea that the Six-Day War represents the military standard for the Arab world is a somewhat humiliating notion. Allowing for the feeble record of the original Nasser, Israelis should not be too disturbed by the prospect of another incarnation. Nor was the Arab street that equivocal about Israel’s existence before these clashes started.

The facts now evident on the ground suggest an entirely different assessment.

First, the damage inflicted by the Israeli Defence Forces on Hezbollah’s infrastructure and resources is far, far greater than the equivalent harm that it has suffered. A sizeable proportion of Hezbollah rocket launchers and fighters have been eliminated, while the Israeli army has lost no more than a few tanks and, to its regret, about 100 soldiers. For a body that is used to incessant combat, this is not a spectacular setback.

Secondly, Hezbollah has deployed a huge percentage of its missile arsenal to very little advantage. Only in the Alice in Wonderland world of the Middle East could it be seen as a “triumph” for a terrorist organisation simply to launch Katyusha missiles in the direction of Israel and roughly 95 per cent of them to hit nothing of any value. It took Hezbollah six years to accumulate a stockpile that, fundamentally, it has wasted.

Thirdly, the administration in Lebanon, which had ostentatiously refused to send its soldiers to the south of that country for the past six years, has been obliged to pledge to the United Nations that it will now do so. It will, furthermore, be under the de facto control of a much larger international force than has been assembled in that region before — one that will be judged a success or otherwise by the extent to which it keeps the place quiet.

The wider strategic consequences of these recent events are yet more significant. Hezbollah was, until July 11, a problem exclusively for Israel. That dilemma has been internationalised. It is now of paramount importance to the Lebanese Government and the UN Security Council. If Lebanon’s troops cannot pacify Hezbollah then ministers there well know that Israel’s air force will be back over Beirut. The UN will come to appreciate that if it cannot maintain the peace this will be because Hezbollah has broken the ceasefire that the Security Council imposed, and its own authority will be endangered. This is an important breakthrough for Israel. If Ehud Olmert, the Prime Minister, had been told six weeks ago that Hezbollah would cease to be the principal militia in southern Lebanon by the beginning of September he wouldn’t have believed it possible.

Further, Israel’s security has been improved more than has been acknowledged. Fewer than three years ago, Israel’s northern border was exposed to Hezbollah, its eastern boundary with the West Bank was so porous that suicide bombers regularly broke through it and its military was engaged in a bitter and often futile attempt to contain Hamas in Gaza. As of now, it can be confident of pushing Hezbollah back beyond the Litani river in Lebanon, the barrier it erected around the West Bank has reduced the number of suicide blast atrocities to the level of an unfortunate irritation and Hamas, whose military command was decapitated by Israel in a series of controversial strikes in 2004, is more likely to engage in a civil war with Fatah than it is seriously to inconvenience Mr Olmert.

The final dimension to this saga may, nevertheless, prove the most compelling. The past few weeks have exposed Iran’s pivotal role as the political patron of terrorism as well as the audacity and extent of its ambitions to shape Islam in its image. None of this has taken Israel by surprise. It has been a severe blow to Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. Jews constitute no threat to mainstream Sunni Islam. The Shia challenge is another matter. Once the crocodile tears for Lebanon have dried up (which will take a month at most) and the mood on the Arab street has moved on (which will not take much longer), it will become obvious to Sunni regimes that Israel is an ally against Iran. The rhetoric directed against Israel will not abate, but it will be increasingly irrelevant.

That Lebanese civilians with no connection to terrorism have died while all this has occurred is a tragedy of the highest order. Israel relied too much on air power at the start of these exchanges and allowed its opponents a propaganda opportunity. Yet, in the end, Israel’s survival does not depend on Arab “hearts and minds” or opinions expressed by television viewers who live many thousands of miles away. It relies instead on winning crucial battles. If this is a “defeat”, then Israel can afford many similar outcomes.

[Gondorian]

http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/45884734/critiques/Red_Cross_Ambulance_Libel_Exposed.asp

Can someone tell me how to post pictures?

http://www.zombietime.com/fraud/ambulance/

http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/001235.html

[Gondorian]

http://www.greekembassy.org/Embassy/content/en/Article.aspx?office=1&folder=24&article=18372

Greece’s humanitarian aid and contribution to the Peace Keeping Forces in Lebanon
27 August, 2006

Humanitarian Aid

Greece was the first country to respond to the humanitarian call submitted by the government of Lebanon to the European Union on July 19, 2006 and the first to become involved in the evacuation of civilians from Lebanon, a gesture recognized by the Lebanese government, the European Union and international organizations.

During the period of war, Greece provided Lebanon

• with a total of 97 tons of material assistance consisting of medical supplies and equipment, foodstuff, water, tents and blankets which have been carried by 8 C-130 flights to Larnaca and then shipped to Beirut on board Greek navy tanks.
• The total amount of Greece’s contribution to the humanitarian crisis in Lebanon (in goods, transportation and monetary contributions to international organizations) is evaluated, up to now, at an approximate 2.5 million euros.
• Furthermore, during the crisis and in order to facilitate further shipping of humanitarian aid, the government of Greece offered other EU member-states free transportation of their aid from Larnaca to Beirut on board Greek ships. Following a request made by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs Evripidis Sytlianidis announced on August 24, 2006 that the Greek government will provide for the free transportation of Swedish humanitarian aid consisting of 10 trucks, 1 trailer, 10.000 blankets, 300 tents and 20 generators from the port of Piraieus, Greece to Cyprus from where it will be shipped to Beirut on board a United Nations vessel.


Evacuation of Civilians

• From the beginning of the crisis, Greece was the first country to participate actively in the evacuation efforts of civilians fleeing Lebanon, helping evacuating a total of 2.861 civilians from 52 nationalities on board Greek navy ships.
• In a letter sent to her Greek counterpart FM Dora Bakoyannis on August 9, 2006, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice thanked the government of Greece for its active and timely action in assisting American citizens to evacuate from war-ravaged Lebanon. «Thank you for Greece's assistance to American citizens departing from Lebanon. Please convey my appreciation to the Greek officials in Athens, Nicosia, Beirut, and Washington, as well as the captain and crew of the Greek vessels, whose efforts culminated in the safe and swift transport of American citizens from Lebanon. I appreciate the ongoing solidarity that the Greek Government has demonstrated to the American people through its decisive, timely actions. We will continue to work closely with you to bring a peaceful resolution to the situation in the Middle East».


Lebanon Peacekeeping Force

The Greek government announced, on August 22, 2006 its intention to contribute to the Lebanon Peacekeeping Force with:

• one Navy Frigate and its helicopter
• a special commando diving unit to carry out ship inspections
• administrative personnel and support supplies, and if needed,
• a landing vessel to transport humanitarian aid from Cyprus to Beirut. The possibility for the deployment of additional units has not been ruled out provided that the situation in Lebanon is normalized. Furthermore, the government of Greece has expressed its intention to participate actively in the reconstruction efforts in Lebanon.


^

[Joseph]

Since this thread has so far been totally one sided.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...311756,00.html

If this was a defeat, the Israelis must be praying for a lot more of them
Tim Hames

IF ONLY Israel were as effective at public relations as at military operations, the results of the conflict on and around its border with Lebanon would be so much starker. As it is, however, the real meaning of the UN resolution that will start to come into force today is being widely misrepresented. Hezbollah is hailing a “victory” of sorts, albeit one of a presentational character. In a bizarre situation, Israeli politicians on both the hard Left and the hard Right appear to agree with the terrorists. All are profoundly mistaken.
What, after all, does this Hezbollah claim consist of? The organisation considers it a triumph that it has not been completely “destroyed” after just four weeks of fighting. It contrasts this with the dismal record of several Arab armies combined in 1967. It has not yet been disarmed and may not be formally neutralised in the near future. Nor has it been discredited on the Arab street, where it has enhanced its popularity. The Hezbollah leader, Sheikh Hassan Nasrullah, thus proclaims himself a “new Nasser”.



As victories rank, not being destroyed, disarmed or discredited is not that impressive. It is hardly Henry V at Agincourt. The idea that the Six-Day War represents the military standard for the Arab world is a somewhat humiliating notion. Allowing for the feeble record of the original Nasser, Israelis should not be too disturbed by the prospect of another incarnation. Nor was the Arab street that equivocal about Israel’s existence before these clashes started.

The facts now evident on the ground suggest an entirely different assessment.

First, the damage inflicted by the Israeli Defence Forces on Hezbollah’s infrastructure and resources is far, far greater than the equivalent harm that it has suffered. A sizeable proportion of Hezbollah rocket launchers and fighters have been eliminated, while the Israeli army has lost no more than a few tanks and, to its regret, about 100 soldiers. For a body that is used to incessant combat, this is not a spectacular setback.

Secondly, Hezbollah has deployed a huge percentage of its missile arsenal to very little advantage. Only in the Alice in Wonderland world of the Middle East could it be seen as a “triumph” for a terrorist organisation simply to launch Katyusha missiles in the direction of Israel and roughly 95 per cent of them to hit nothing of any value. It took Hezbollah six years to accumulate a stockpile that, fundamentally, it has wasted.

Thirdly, the administration in Lebanon, which had ostentatiously refused to send its soldiers to the south of that country for the past six years, has been obliged to pledge to the United Nations that it will now do so. It will, furthermore, be under the de facto control of a much larger international force than has been assembled in that region before — one that will be judged a success or otherwise by the extent to which it keeps the place quiet.

The wider strategic consequences of these recent events are yet more significant. Hezbollah was, until July 11, a problem exclusively for Israel. That dilemma has been internationalised. It is now of paramount importance to the Lebanese Government and the UN Security Council. If Lebanon’s troops cannot pacify Hezbollah then ministers there well know that Israel’s air force will be back over Beirut. The UN will come to appreciate that if it cannot maintain the peace this will be because Hezbollah has broken the ceasefire that the Security Council imposed, and its own authority will be endangered. This is an important breakthrough for Israel. If Ehud Olmert, the Prime Minister, had been told six weeks ago that Hezbollah would cease to be the principal militia in southern Lebanon by the beginning of September he wouldn’t have believed it possible.

Further, Israel’s security has been improved more than has been acknowledged. Fewer than three years ago, Israel’s northern border was exposed to Hezbollah, its eastern boundary with the West Bank was so porous that suicide bombers regularly broke through it and its military was engaged in a bitter and often futile attempt to contain Hamas in Gaza. As of now, it can be confident of pushing Hezbollah back beyond the Litani river in Lebanon, the barrier it erected around the West Bank has reduced the number of suicide blast atrocities to the level of an unfortunate irritation and Hamas, whose military command was decapitated by Israel in a series of controversial strikes in 2004, is more likely to engage in a civil war with Fatah than it is seriously to inconvenience Mr Olmert.

The final dimension to this saga may, nevertheless, prove the most compelling. The past few weeks have exposed Iran’s pivotal role as the political patron of terrorism as well as the audacity and extent of its ambitions to shape Islam in its image. None of this has taken Israel by surprise. It has been a severe blow to Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. Jews constitute no threat to mainstream Sunni Islam. The Shia challenge is another matter. Once the crocodile tears for Lebanon have dried up (which will take a month at most) and the mood on the Arab street has moved on (which will not take much longer), it will become obvious to Sunni regimes that Israel is an ally against Iran. The rhetoric directed against Israel will not abate, but it will be increasingly irrelevant.

That Lebanese civilians with no connection to terrorism have died while all this has occurred is a tragedy of the highest order. Israel relied too much on air power at the start of these exchanges and allowed its opponents a propaganda opportunity. Yet, in the end, Israel’s survival does not depend on Arab “hearts and minds” or opinions expressed by television viewers who live many thousands of miles away. It relies instead on winning crucial battles. If this is a “defeat”, then Israel can afford many similar outcomes.

I do agree that with the way the Muslim world has been losing in recent centuries, only they could genuinely charaterize the latest events in Lebanon as a "victory". Everyone lost in this last round in varying degrees.

The Israeli's lost their reputation of invincibility and the Lebanese just had their country thrust back a decade (in terms of development and stability) by Hezobollah.

The bigger, all-emcompassing war is growing closer and closer my friends.

[Gondorian]

Hi Joseph, I'm glad we can agree on this issue as well.

This whole recent debacle has been awful for everyone.

[Gavur]

It also made millions of people around the world anti-Israeli the polarization of the world continues.
The war is against all moderates from all religions and races.This has become very clear by the US/Israel/Turkish alliance.They are forcing the world into extremism.This people who are doing this have a false god all believers that believe in the light of havens not of this earth must pray for these.Not just the victims but also for the agressors ,cause they do not know what they're doing.Let our fathers light illuminate their hearts and minds so they can turn back, back from losing their souls if theres still time.

[Gondorian]

It also made millions of people around the world anti-Israeli the polarization of the world continues..

Since you are anti-Israel why should you care?

The war is against all moderates from all religions and races.

No it isn't, it was a war waged on Hezbollah and Lebanon against Israel where Israel responded the way any European Nation would have done, and significantly better then what China is doing to Tibet which I have never seen you complain about. Everyone lost during this war.

This has become very clear by the US/Israel/Turkish alliance.

Considering Turkey took the side of Lebanon and Hezbollah during this conflict you are begging to give an explanation for that innacurate statement, and if you are claiming the United States and Israel are no better then Turkey then I think you have lost all perspective.

They are forcing the world into extremism.

Nobody is ever forced to be an extremist it is always a choice of an individual to be evil.

This people who are doing this have a false god all believers that believe in the light of havens not of this earth must pray for these

No such thing as a false God, one persons heresy is another persons true religion.