View Full Version : Israel and Lebanon seem to agree to cease-fire...
...but Nabi Bari says no.
Who's running the show in Lebanon?
Hezbollah, I think.
Wrong again.
Hezbollah have agreed to the ceasefire, but won't implement it unless Israel conform to the ceasefire conditions.
However, Israel say they won't leave Lebanon yet, which is part of the ceasefire conditions.
I really don't understand why you continually post half-truths. We are all capable of reading what is actually being said, we don't need your distorted viewpoint.
Even foxnews (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,208065,00.html) managed to get it right.
Wrong again.
Hezbollah have agreed to the ceasefire, but won't implement it unless Israel conform to the ceasefire conditions.
However, Israel say they won't leave Lebanon yet, which is part of the ceasefire conditions.
I really don't understand why you continually post half-truths. We are all capable of reading what is actually being said, we don't need your distorted viewpoint.
Even foxnews (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,208065,00.html) managed to get it right.
You've missed something.
I will assume you already know who Nabi Bari is in order to inform you he successfully importuned the Lebanese Government not to convene the ratifying session; Hezbollah has had second thoughts, apparently.
I'll leave you to speculate as to the 'why' of this, while I await an actual, verifiable ceasefire.
Once again, you are wrong, the ceasefire plan was ratified on Saturday.
What was cancelled was a meeting about the deployment of the 15000 troops.
Considering the relative proportions of the population, I think you've got a nerve suggesting Hezbollah should not have some influence when the Jewish influence on your own government is so immense.
Considering the relative proportions of the population, I think you've got a nerve suggesting Hezbollah should not have some influence when the Jewish influence on your own government is so immense.
I never suggested Hezbollah should have "no influence"; they have elected representatives in Lebanon, after all.
However, they are a wee minority there, and are wielding influence and military force out of all proportion to their elected standing, having effectively supplanted the Lebanese government.
Last I looked, the "Jewish influence" hasn't got it's own militia in the U.S.
I think any reasonable person would weigh these facts and say your point has blunted itself, and effectively, too.
Errm, I think your point was that the ceasefire was not being ratified.
Want to explain those "facts" again? :lol:
Errm, I think your point was that the ceasefire was not being ratified.
Wrong again-this was my point:
...but Nabi Bari says no.
Who's running the show in Lebanon?
Hezbollah, I think.
Let's watch the process and see how it goes...
I'm betting Israel won't be the one to break the agreement, but I'm likewise quite sure that it will be broken.
tralalala
08-17-2006, 06:21 AM
Well, the Lebanese parliament decided to send their army down South, and have agreed that they will be the only force with arms down south..
Apparently, it seems, Hizbollah will not leave the south and not drop arms, but will "leave them at home" in the south, therefor they will still be armed but not use them in the south..
I doubt it very much, these prats probably will still use them under the nose of the Lebanese forces.
SeK612
08-17-2006, 06:45 AM
Nice to see an international force stepping in before things got much worse.
Good to see France stepping up to the plate too (I feel much more confident with Europe in charge of maintaining peace than I would if it were America attempting to do the same).
Frustrating to see the Lebanese people come off worse from this conflict. Whilst I appreciate that Israel suffers at the hands of the Arabs it always seems a little unbalanced when Israel unleashes it's massive military force against their much poorer and ill equipped neighbours.
tralalala
08-17-2006, 12:22 PM
And here's the same question: What is Israel meant to do then? Just because the ones attacking us are using shitty arms, means we can't attack back at full strength?? You must understand, that unlike the Arab countries, there is only 1 Jewish state, and Israel doesn't step up and beat the hell out of people trying to hurt us, we shall disappear off the face of the earth.
That's why the next time Hizbollah attack us, Israel should send out 1 huge warning saying we shall raise to the ground every single house with arms or rockets being lanched from it, and if the people living there don't move, tough shit - you let those assholes build their bunkers from your house, you pay for it. So next time, no ground force will be needed, just attack any building which is being used as a place to launch attacks from, and let the bastards suffocate in their own bunkers, and that is how it should end.
It's sad that that's how it should be done but there is no other way to attack a guerilla organization which keeps trying to kill off the Jews. They didn't even give out warnings they were going to attack a certain place, unlike Israel, and although they claimed to be targeting only IDF bases, they killed some 40 civilians... screw them.
Delorean
08-17-2006, 03:13 PM
Nice to see an international force stepping in before things got much worse.
Good to see France stepping up to the plate too (I feel much more confident with Europe in charge of maintaining peace than I would if it were America attempting to do the same).
Agreed!:P
Delorean
08-17-2006, 03:26 PM
And here's the same question: What is Israel meant to do then? Just because the ones attacking us are using shitty arms, means we can't attack back at full strength?? You must understand, that unlike the Arab countries, there is only 1 Jewish state, and Israel doesn't step up and beat the hell out of people trying to hurt us, we shall disappear off the face of the earth.
That's why the next time Hizbollah attack us, Israel should send out 1 huge warning saying we shall raise to the ground every single house with arms or rockets being lanched from it, and if the people living there don't move, tough shit - you let those assholes build their bunkers from your house, you pay for it. So next time, no ground force will be needed, just attack any building which is being used as a place to launch attacks from, and let the bastards suffocate in their own bunkers, and that is how it should end.
It's sad that that's how it should be done but there is no other way to attack a guerilla organization which keeps trying to kill off the Jews. They didn't even give out warnings they were going to attack a certain place, unlike Israel, and although they claimed to be targeting only IDF bases, they killed some 40 civilians... screw them.
If you feel like that for 40 civilians; imagine how the Lebanese should feel. We tried to sent help from the Red Cross and "accidentally" some missles blew up the convoy transporting civilians to safe location in order to receive the help from Red Cross.
On the other hand, i agree with you that Israel warned for the places the attacks would take place in order for people to leave and your anger for their sudden missle attacks. But.. Don't know man, its war thats going on..
tralalala
08-17-2006, 04:30 PM
about Red Cross thingy - Israel said explicitly that it would blow any truck riding on certain roads... they did so knowingly, and thats the outcome.
Hizbollah faked 20+ bodies in the Qana attack, they use humans as their sheild.. so what to do? next time you blow them all up.. the guerillas and the ones who feel good with the guerillas at the top of politics in Lebanon
I'm betting Israel won't be the one to break the agreement, but I'm likewise quite sure that it will be broken.Right about it being borken, but you lost your bet.
tralalala
08-20-2006, 07:36 AM
@lynx - Wrong again.
Part of the agreement was Hizbollah laving to the north of the Litani river, and calling to disarm all armed militias in the south apart from the Lebanese army. Hizbollah never did either of those, therefor Israel's strike to try and stop the re-arming of this group is totally acceptable - it's for Israels protection. Plus, France have backed off their huge willingness to send thousands of troops.. they sent 50 yesterday (thats really going to make the difference....), and hlaf the other countries said they were having second thoughts- why? cos no one iss willing to lose soldiers attacking in the middle east, therefor the only armed force left to try and make a change is the Israeli Defence Force.
I'm betting Israel won't be the one to break the agreement, but I'm likewise quite sure that it will be broken.Right about it being borken, but you lost your bet.
I'm quite sure I have never read, nor even heard, the word borken in my life.
Is it some obscure reference to a certain Supreme Court nominee back in the '80s, perchance?
@lynx - Wrong again.
Part of the agreement was Hizbollah laving to the north of the Litani river, and calling to disarm all armed militias in the south apart from the Lebanese army. Hizbollah never did either of those, therefor Israel's strike to try and stop the re-arming of this group is totally acceptable - it's for Israels protection. Plus, France have backed off their huge willingness to send thousands of troops.. they sent 50 yesterday (thats really going to make the difference....), and hlaf the other countries said they were having second thoughts- why? cos no one iss willing to lose soldiers attacking in the middle east, therefor the only armed force left to try and make a change is the Israeli Defence Force.
Stand by for your nullification, Rafi.
You cannot refute lynx, it is simply not allowed, you impudent Israeli person. :P
@lynx - Wrong again.
Part of the agreement was Hizbollah laving to the north of the Litani river, and calling to disarm all armed militias in the south apart from the Lebanese army. Hizbollah never did either of those, therefor Israel's strike to try and stop the re-arming of this group is totally acceptable - it's for Israels protection. Plus, France have backed off their huge willingness to send thousands of troops.. they sent 50 yesterday (thats really going to make the difference....), and hlaf the other countries said they were having second thoughts- why? cos no one iss willing to lose soldiers attacking in the middle east, therefor the only armed force left to try and make a change is the Israeli Defence Force.You and your countryman obviously don't understand the meaning of ceasefire. It's really not that difficult, it means you stop firing. Always asuming that there isn't some obscure Hebrew interpretation which means that one side stops firing while the other side keeps going.
It's hardly surprising that countries are having second thoughts, when your troops keep firing at anything that moves. They are waiting for clarification on the rules of engagement, and they aren't talking about against Hezbollah.
tralalala
08-20-2006, 05:41 PM
what!?
the ceasefire was part of an agreement that said israel and hizbollah would stop firing at eachother, hizbollah would leave the south, and eventually disarm. therefor, if one side breaks a part of the agreement (in this case hizbollah, who have stayed in the south and have no means of disarming), there is no reason why israel should not try and stop them re-arming themselves. its a 2 way thing lynx. the ceasefire was not the only thing that was put on the table before the UN last week...
i think its a bit of a grey area, but on the balance of things i agree with Lynx. Israel rather than Hezbollah have breached the resoluiton.
If you read the text of the resolution, the only thing Hezbollah are required to do is cease fire. Once the Lebanese army and UN forces take over, then its their long term task to ensure that there are only Lebanese military weapons & personnel south of the Litani river. Restocking doesn't seem to be mentioned so its not an accepted reason for recommencing operations.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4785963.stm
...the only thing Hezbollah are required to do is cease fire...
This is incorrect.
In the opening sentence of the U.N. statement, res. 1559 is recalled, and again reiterated in part 8.
Resolution 1559 specifically calls for Hezbollah to dis-arm, not re-arm.
Resolution 1701 also reaffirms resolutions 425 426 520 1655 1680 and 1697.
Resolution 425:
Calls for strict respect for the territorial integrity, sovereignty and political independence of Lebanon within its internationally recognized boundaries.
Calls upon Israel immediately to cease its military action against Lebanese territorial integrity and withdraw forthwith its forces from all Lebanese territory.
Resolution 520:
Calls again for the strict respect for Lebanon's sovereignty, territorial integrity, unity and political independence under the sole and exclusive authority of the Lebanese Government through the Lebanese Army throughout Lebanon.
You can't pick and choose which resolutions are important.
...the only thing Hezbollah are required to do is cease fire...
This is incorrect.
In the opening sentence of the U.N. statement, res. 1559 is recalled, and again reiterated in part 8.
Resolution 1559 specifically calls for Hezbollah to dis-arm, not re-arm.
come on you know tralalala was referring to the ceasefire resolution. The text of 1559 doesn't mention anything about moving weapons/personnel around, so as long as hezbollah exist then they are automatically in breach, so by your argument 1701 has no purpose and is not a ceasefire agreement.
Plus as long as hezbollah aren't getting any new missiles then technically they are disarming... right into israel :P
tralalala
08-21-2006, 12:25 AM
not at all..
The UN is more or less trying to turn Hizbollah from an armed force to a political force, rather than a mix of both.
Resolution 1701 also reaffirms resolutions 425 426 520 1655 1680 and 1697.
Resolution 425:
Calls for strict respect for the territorial integrity, sovereignty and political independence of Lebanon within its internationally recognized boundaries.
Calls upon Israel immediately to cease its military action against Lebanese territorial integrity and withdraw forthwith its forces from all Lebanese territory.
Resolution 520:
Calls again for the strict respect for Lebanon's sovereignty, territorial integrity, unity and political independence under the sole and exclusive authority of the Lebanese Government through the Lebanese Army throughout Lebanon.
You can't pick and choose which resolutions are important.
Ian's point was that he saw no reference to Hezbollah's being required to do anything apart from cessation of active fire.
I refuted his contention effectively.
Nothing else was at issue, therefore no 'picking and choosing' took place, and there is no need for your mis-appropriation of the color blue in your post.
Please choose another color in the future.
Ian-
You are in error.
Fact.
Sorry, but there it is. ;)
Busyman™
08-21-2006, 12:54 AM
Lebanon Warns Against Inciting Israel
BEIRUT, Lebanon (AP) - Lebanon's defense minister said Sunday he is certain Hezbollah will not break the cease-fire but warned all militant groups of harsh measures and a traitor's fate if they incite Israeli retaliation by firing rockets into the Jewish state.
Defense Minister Elias Murr's strong remarks indicated concern that Syrian-backed Palestinian militants might try to restart the fighting by drawing retaliation from Israel.
Prime Minister Fuad Saniora, meanwhile, toured the devastated Hezbollah stronghold in south Beirut and decried the destruction by Israeli bombs as a "crime against humanity." Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, a Shiite and Hezbollah backer, stood at the Sunni premier's side and said they spoke with one voice.
In Jerusalem, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said he would name a panel to investigate the military and government's performance during the war, which has been criticized by many Israelis as weak and indecisive.
A day after Israeli commandos staged a pre-dawn raid deep into Lebanon, prompting U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan to declare the Israelis in violation of the Security Council cease-fire resolution, no new clashes were reported.
Residents in the mountains east of Beirut, however, described continued overflights by Israeli warplanes on the truce's seventh day.
Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Mark Regev said Saturday's raid was aimed at disrupting arms shipments to Hezbollah and such operations may continue until international peacekeepers arrive to enforce an arms embargo.
"In the situation where there was a flagrant violation of the embargo, Israel had the right to act. Had there not been a violation, Israel would not have to respond," he said Sunday, expressing impatience with the slow international response in offering troops for the peacekeeping force.
Siding with Jerusalem, the U.S. government also said the Israeli raid underscored the importance of quickly deploying an expanded U.N. peacekeeping force in southern Lebanon.
"We've seen the press reports and noted the Israeli statement saying that the operation was a reaction to arms smuggling," White House spokeswoman Emily Lawrimore said, adding that preventing the resupply of weapons to Hezbollah by Syria and Iran is a key provision of the cease-fire plan.
The Lebanese defense minister insisted that Hezbollah would hold its fire.
"We consider that when the resistance (Hezbollah) is committed not to fire rockets, then any rocket that is fired from the Lebanese territory would be considered collaboration with Israel to provide a pretext (for Israel) to strike," Murr said.
He added that "the Lebanese army will decisively deal with" any attack on Israel and that anyone arrested for violating the truce "will be considered by the military tribunal as an agent of the Israeli enemy."
Murr did not repeat his threat of Saturday to stop the deployment of Lebanon's army in the south to protest Israel's helicopter-borne commando raid near the town of Boudai on the west side of the Bekaa Valley, a Hezbollah stronghold.
Such a halt would be a blow to the U.N. cease-fire plan, which calls for the army and a strong U.N. peacekeeping force to police the truce and separate Israeli troops and Hezbollah's guerrillas.
Murr apparently was satisfied by a declaration from Annan warning Israel against a repeat of the raid.
Townspeople in Boudai said 300 residents grabbed guns after the Israeli raid began at 3 a.m. and fought at the side of 15 Hezbollah guerrillas for 90 minutes before the commandos retreated and were flown back to Israel. Residents said there were no casualties on the Lebanese side. One Israeli officer was killed and two soldiers were wounded.
Under the U.N. cease-fire that took effect a week ago Monday, Lebanon has started deploying 15,000 soldiers in its southern region, putting a government force there for the first time in four decades.
It is to be joined by an equal force of international peacekeepers, but wrangling among countries expected to send troops has delayed the mission and U.N. officials are pleading for nations to participate to bolster the fragile truce.
France, which commands the existing U.N. force in Lebanon, UNIFIL, on Sunday called for a meeting of European Union countries this week to determine the number of troops they are prepared to contribute to the U.N. mission.
"We are asking that Europe express its solidarity toward Lebanon as rapidly as possible," Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy told radio Franco Info.
The Israeli prime minister complicated the effort with a reported decision Sunday to reject peacekeepers in Lebanon from countries that don't have diplomatic relations with the Jewish state.
Indonesia, Malaysia and Bangladesh - Muslim countries that do not have diplomatic ties with Israel - are among the only countries so far to have offered front-line troops for the expanded force.
The U.N. cease-fire resolution does not explicitly give Israel authority to block countries from joining the peacekeeping mission, but it does say the force should coordinate its activites with the Lebanese and Israeli governments.
Saniora, the prime minister, made his first visit Sunday to Hezbollah's south Beirut stronghold, where airstrikes wrecked whole neighborhoods.
"What we see today is an image of the crimes Israel has committed ... there is no other description other than a criminal act that shows Israel's hatred to destroy Lebanon and its unity," Saniora told reporters and television crews invited on the tour.
"I hope the international media transmits this picture to every person in the world so that it shows this criminal act, this crime against humanity," the Western-backed prime minister said.
While he visited, Hezbollah's operatives were still handing out bundles of $100 bills to people who lost homes to Israeli bombs - $12,000 for each claimant. The stipend is to pay a year's rent and refurnish homes.
Arab foreign ministers held an emergency meeting in Egypt, and Arab League Deputy Secretary-General Ahmed Ben Heli said they would discuss setting up a fund to rebuild Lebanon, which lost an estimated 15,000 apartments, 140 bridges and other structures.
Diplomats said Arab governments wanted to counter the flood of Iranian money that is believed to be financing the Hezbollah handouts.
Iran, which is not an Arab nation, denied that Sunday. "Hezbollah is a legitimate body in Lebanon; they have their own economic resources and popular support there," Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said in Tehran.
:)
tralalala
08-21-2006, 05:02 AM
Amazing how much talk one government can say...
The Lebanese government has NO control over Hizbollah, whether they like it or not, Nasrallah has control over his group and they can do what they want, when they want... so no amount of talking or flexing muscles is going to make any difference whatsoever about what's going to happen with Hizbollah people....
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.