|
and Lebanon continues shelling Israel- do you think they will simply stop?
|
I was listening to a radio show this morning and heard this:
Newsperson: The US is calling for a complete cease-fire in the Middle East. Host: Great. Including Iraq? Newsperson: Ah, no. |
Meanwhile, with most people concentrating on the war in Lebanon ... hardly any attention is paid to the blood bath in Baghdad ... where people have been being killed at the rate of a hundred per day ever since the U.S. launched its crackdown to take back the city.
Yeah, we're doing a bang-up job over there (and I'm not suggesting the hundred daily deaths are at the hands of U.S. servicemen). But a hundred daily deaths, in Baghdad alone, is violent death at twice the rate of Lebonese civilian war casualties. F U C K! (you know, we libs really hate being so right) |
Speaking of propaganda...
Quote:
|
The Iraqi President has such an unfortunate name. Talabani. (I know he can't help that and he's not tied to the Taliban, but...) :D
|
As for the first link in the first post. It appears the author was confusing filing timestamps with photo timestamps. That is, assuming that the timestamp indicated when the photo was taken when it really indicates when the photo was published by the wire service.
|
Quote:
:) |
Quote:
I understand Israel doesn't trust Hezbolla to actually disarm, even in an agreement, so they want to destroy their capabilities. I'm not sure how much damage they're doing to Hezbollah, but they're certainly killing Lebanon. As far as the civilians still being there, they are really between two very nasty choices. Stay in your home and be bombed, or leave on a road that's being bombed, knowing that your leaving will be a vote to give the territory on which you live to Israel in the eventual (hoped for ) agreement. That is one of the things that happened last time- the civilians left, and Israel used that as a reason to take the "vacant" land. |
One problem here is that it's very difficult for the US to intercede without us looking like complete hypocrites. When Israel pulled out of Lebanon last time, it was based on an agreement that Lebanon wouldn't let Hezbollah (or anyone) set up camp in the formerly occupied area and start shelling Israel again. Lebanon didn't (or weren't able) to keep their part of the bargain. The shelling resumed, and has gone on for years. The kidnapped soldiers were Israel's excuse, but realistically they could have used any number of incidents. Israel's argument that Lebanon is responsible for Hezbollah is equivalent to the argument that we used to say that the Afghani government was responsible for the terrorists living in that country.
|
It's chilling, isn't it, to think that we, then, are responsible for the worst acts committed by the United States, which is our legitimate government?
In fact, it's almost surprising that 9/11 doesn't have nine or eleven brother-incidents. |
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:45 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.