And here we go, its personal attack time. In fairness, it took a bit longer than it usually does.
Once again you extrapolate my opinion on someone cracking a joke about loss of human life to a direct personal attack on you. Perhaps you should crack a joke to make yourself feel better. All in all it was a good attempt at deflecting from the subject matter.
Landmines are actually a huge issue in the Golan heights. The area is literally littered with landmines set by the Syrians, who have refused to supply Israel with the maps of where these mines are laid out. As a result anyone driving through the Golan will constantly see fields cordoned off by barbed fire fences with signs warning of unexploded landmines. Because the IDF has done such a good job of marking the areas that might be dangerous no one (except the supremely stupid) are in danger, though every year a few grazing cattle that wander into the wrong field are blown up. Still, it's pretty dick of the Syrians, even without a peace treaty, to refuse to just give Israel the maps of where they left all their mines.
What is "pretty dick" is the Israelis not giving Lebanon the maps for the 1.2 million cluster bomblets they terrorised civilians with. Even after more than 20 civilians were killed from them AFTER the war had ended.
Plus Golan Heights is Syrian after all. If the Israelis did a good job of returning it to them then maybe they could diffuse them themselves. Ever thought of that? or the idea of giving the land back to its rightful owner never crossed your mind?
You don't set cluster bombs, therefore you can't make maps of where they are. And if Syria would like to get the Golan back they might want to consider taking Israel up on the peace negotiations that Israel has repeatedly offered over the years. And let me get this straight, you think it's perfectly alright for a country that is not actively at war with another country to refuse such a small thing as to give up maps of where you left your landmines? Cause it sounds like what you are saying is that since Israel is so terrible it's perfectly fine for all Israel's enemies to do whatever the fuck they want.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
You don't set cluster bombs, therefore you can't make maps of where they are. And if Syria would like to get the Golan back they might want to consider taking Israel up on the peace negotiations that Israel has repeatedly offered over the years. And let me get this straight, you think it's perfectly alright for a country that is not actively at war with another country to refuse such a small thing as to give up maps of where you left your landmines? Cause it sounds like what you are saying is that since Israel is so terrible it's perfectly fine for all Israel's enemies to do whatever the fuck they want.
You seriously believe that a country that had land taken from it should give the occupying country a map of where they put their landmines? That is like a burglar taking my television, dvr, stereo system, and blu ray player and then calling me the next day and asking me how to operate the universal remote for them.
You don't set cluster bombs, therefore you can't make maps of where they are. And if Syria would like to get the Golan back they might want to consider taking Israel up on the peace negotiations that Israel has repeatedly offered over the years. And let me get this straight, you think it's perfectly alright for a country that is not actively at war with another country to refuse such a small thing as to give up maps of where you left your landmines? Cause it sounds like what you are saying is that since Israel is so terrible it's perfectly fine for all Israel's enemies to do whatever the fuck they want.
You attempt to flip things around to make the other look evil as a way to validate your argument. That is quite lame.
I didn't think my post was that hard to understand but I guess some people need it broken down for them to grasp it. Please refer me to where my post said it was perfectly alright for the Syrians to refuse israel the maps. I believe my post said, if the israelis were so worried about land mines in the Golan Heights then perhaps they should get the fuck out of there. I'd say that is a very valid way of solving the problem. But both you and I know that Israel does not want to leave some of most fertile land in the region and a great water source.
And once again, this drivel about peace negotiations being refused when the Israelis are always the ones to set conditions that will be automatically refused as a way to fuel their propaganda machine. "We want peace but we wont give you what is yours, in fact we'll take more". I think you zionists should take that up as your official motto.
With regards to cluster bomb munitions the UN requested many times for locations of where they were dropped to have a general idea of where they should be targetting in their sweeps. I'm sure you already knew that but only tried to deflect cause your argument was just drivel.
You seriously believe that a country that had land taken from it should give the occupying country a map of where they put their landmines? That is like a burglar taking my television, dvr, stereo system, and blu ray player and then calling me the next day and asking me how to operate the universal remote for them.
It would be quite mean of you not to help them out. He'll have to walk all the way to the tv to change the bloody channel
Human rights investigators say Israeli forces engaged in "wanton destruction" of Palestinian homes during the recent conflict in Gaza.
Amnesty International has told the BBC News website the methods used raised concerns about war crimes.
Israel's military said buildings were destroyed because of military "operational needs".
The Israeli Defense Forces said they operated in accordance with international law during the conflict.
However, the use of mines to destroy homes contradicted this claim, the head of the Amnesty International fact-finding mission to southern Israel and Gaza, Donatella Rovera, has argued.
Israeli troops had to leave their vehicles to plant the mines, indicating that they faced no danger and that there was no military or operational justification, she said.
========
Ms Rovera said her team found fragments of anti-tank mines in and around destroyed properties.
Their use was also consistent with remains of houses, collapsed in on themselves as if blown up from below, rather than destroyed from above as in an airstrike, she said.
Troops would have had to leave their armoured vehicles to plant them and rig up the detonators, she said.
"Unless those operating on the ground felt not just 100% but 200% secure - that the places were not booby trapped, that they wouldn't come under fire - they could not have got out of the vehicles," she said. "They would not have used that method."
"The use of the method tells us even more that there wasn't the kind of danger that might have made it lawful to destroy some of those properties," Ms Rovera said.
=====
Mr Atamna said a UN ordnance clearance team had found several mines in and around the remains of one of the homes.
He said he and his family had fled the area during the Israeli military operation, and returned to find their homes demolished.
You seriously believe that a country that had land taken from it should give the occupying country a map of where they put their landmines? That is like a burglar taking my television, dvr, stereo system, and blu ray player and then calling me the next day and asking me how to operate the universal remote for them.
It would be quite mean of you not to help them out. He'll have to walk all the way to the tv to change the bloody channel
Ok, that got nasty kind of fast. You're right you didn't say that Syria shouldn't tell Israel where they left their mines, but you'll forgive me if I took that to be the implication of your response. I don't know where you have the idea that Israel wants anything from Syria other than peace, since multiple Israeli governments have signaled a willingness to negotiate with Syria on the basis of land for peace, specifically the Golan in exchange for peace. If you want to believe that Israel never does anything in good faith that is your business, but I think that you are all seeing only part of the picture.
While we've brought up Syria for a second, another question: Why isn't anyone on this thread upset about Syria. This is a country that actively sponsors terrorism, that up until very recently was occupying Lebanon and still maintains a grip on the country through Hezbollah and the SSNP, and that regularly assassinates Lebanese leaders that cross the Assad regime. Do we not care about this? I know I do.
And lest anyone accuse me of trying to deflect attention, I would say that first, discussing the faults of other country's in the region need not detract from your discussions of how much you all loath Israel, and second, perhaps we could gain a better understanding of where Israel is coming from if we take a realistic view of who the neighbors it has to deal with actually are.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
Wow, seriouslly yosi? Syria? Well let me start by saying A- the Golan heights belongs to me personally and my family. My grandfather was born there and my uncles bombed out Mercedes is still parked in front of the old house. B- Syria at least GOT OUT of Lebanon, can you say the same about Israel? C- if you think anyone on this thread besides the joker believe you when you think it's actually Syria who are behind those assasinations, I've got news for you my brother. Who benefits the most from those assasinations? Read between the lines. So go on and bring up Syria but I'm telling you, you're wasting your time.
Everyone and their mother knows that Syria is behind those assassinations! And who benefits the most by killing the people who oppose Syria's continued interference in Lebanese affairs is Syria.
Are you Syrian?
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
Yah that makes a lot of sense. Syria well make it that obvious. You've got to be kidding me. Look I'm no fan of any Arab leader in any part of the world but I'm telling you, SYRIA was NOT behind those assasinations. Oh and my mother will tell you the same so your wrong on everyones mother.
If you want to replace the word “Destiny” with a more modern term, you might get a hint from a banner that was displayed after the murder of Rafik Hariri. syrial killers, it read, simply. The street reaction to the murder of Rafik Hariri was so intense that it led to the passage of a United Nations resolution mandating the withdrawal of the Syrian Army from Lebanon after almost three decades of occupation. However, it remains the case that those who inconvenience Syria by their criticisms are bad liabilities from the life-insurance point of view. Since somebody’s car bomb killed Hariri and 22 others, somebody has killed Samir Kassir and Gibran Tueni, two of the bravest journalists and editors at the independent newspaper An-Nahar (The Day). Somebody has killed Pierre Gemayel, a leader of the country’s Maronite Catholic community. Somebody has killed George Hawi, a former leader of the Lebanese Communist Party. Somebody has killed Captain Wissam Eid, a senior police intelligence officer in the investigation of the Hariri murder. The murders of these Lebanese patriots, and four others of nearly equal prominence, were all highly professional explosive-charge or hit-squad jobs, and their victims all had one, and only one, thing in common [opposition to Syria]. In a highly unusual resolution, the United Nations has established a tribunal to inquire into the Hariri murder and its ramifications, four Lebanese former generals with ties to Syria have been arrested on suspicion, and an office in The Hague has already begun the preliminary proceedings.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
"The Syrian regime assassinated senior officer Mohammed Suleiman," a Syrian opposition official told Ynet on Monday afternoon. The source, Sheik Abdullah al-Raghib al-Hamed, a member of the Syrian Democratic Coalition (SDC), believes that Syrian President Bashar Assad ordered the assassination in order to eliminate witnesses that may incriminate him before international courts investigating the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik al-Hariri, which occurred over three years ago.
Whodunnit
Report: Syria's liaison officer to Hizbullah assassinated / Roee Nahmias
Arab website reports Mohammed Suleiman, who served as Assad's senior advisor, killed by sniper fire over weekend
Full story
"Suleiman was a military engineer by trade. He was surprisingly promoted until he became very close to President Assad. He was suspected of contributing to Hariri's assassination, and due to the ensuing situation he was slowly estranged from all Syrian issues he had formerly commanded except for one – liaison with Hizbullah," al-Hamed said.
When asked why he thought the assassination was masterminded by the government and not an outside source, he said, "The area in which he was killed is surrounded by sensitive military facilities belonging to the Syrian army's intelligence, and it is very well secured. The fact that a sniper shot him is more evidence that the regime did it. The regime's goal is to get rid of anyone who could arrive at an international court and incriminate Assad."
Al-Hamed claimed that the Syrian regime is well-known for using this tactic, and mentioned the case of former Interior Minister Ghazi Canaan, who was found dead in his office in Syria a number of years ago, and who the government claimed had committed suicide.
"We don't know who will be next. It may be a Lebanese opposition figure. I won't even rule out the possibility that the head of intelligence and the president's son in law, Assaf Shawkat, will 'commit suicide' in the future. It's all to do with Hariri," al-Hamed said.
When asked why he thought the Syrian regime had kept quiet over the report, he answered, "Who would they blame? There is no evidence that Israel did it. Why would Israel kill him?"
Regarding reports about Suleiman's involvement in the establishment of Syria's demolished nuclear reactor, al-Hamed said, "I don't think he was connected to it. He was removed over a year ago from all important issues… He was murdered because of the assassination of Rafik al-Hariri. He was part of the inner circle in charge of the assassination. He took care of the logistics."
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
No I'm adiga. My grandfathers father left Russia to Syria when Russia tried to genocide my people back then. Russia killed 2 million of my people. Thats 2,000,000. It's not quite 6 million but it's a lot.
Ok yosi I get it, Syria bad. But what's the differense with Israel targeting official Hamas leaders? Wether you like it or not Hamas IS there government. It doesn't matter what anyone thinks, that's there legaly voted in government. You wanted democratic that's what they voted.
Ok yosi I get it, Syria bad. But what's the differense with Israel targeting official Hamas leaders? Wether you like it or not Hamas IS there government. It doesn't matter what anyone thinks, that's there legaly voted in government. You wanted democratic that's what they voted.
The difference is that Syria is assassinating Lebanese leaders for nothing more than opposing them, while Israel is assassinating leaders of Hamas because they are terrorists who attack Israel. That is a pretty big difference.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
Ok yosi I get it, Syria bad. But what's the differense with Israel targeting official Hamas leaders? Wether you like it or not Hamas IS there government. It doesn't matter what anyone thinks, that's there legaly voted in government. You wanted democratic that's what they voted.
The difference is that Syria is assassinating Lebanese leaders for nothing more than opposing them, while Israel is assassinating leaders of Hamas because they are terrorists who attack Israel. That is a pretty big difference.
There is no difference - both states are eliminating those who are perceived as threats to their own domination of the region. We could discuss political assassinations in East Timor as well but that really has butkus to do with Israel's war crimes of dropping white phosphorous, does it?
Ok yosi I get it, Syria bad. But what's the differense with Israel targeting official Hamas leaders? Wether you like it or not Hamas IS there government. It doesn't matter what anyone thinks, that's there legaly voted in government. You wanted democratic that's what they voted.
The difference is that Syria is assassinating Lebanese leaders for nothing more than opposing them, while Israel is assassinating leaders of Hamas because they are terrorists who attack Israel. That is a pretty big difference.
Ok, that got nasty kind of fast. You're right you didn't say that Syria shouldn't tell Israel where they left their mines, but you'll forgive me if I took that to be the implication of your response. I don't know where you have the idea that Israel wants anything from Syria other than peace, since multiple Israeli governments have signaled a willingness to negotiate with Syria on the basis of land for peace, specifically the Golan in exchange for peace. If you want to believe that Israel never does anything in good faith that is your business, but I think that you are all seeing only part of the picture.
While we've brought up Syria for a second, another question: Why isn't anyone on this thread upset about Syria. This is a country that actively sponsors terrorism, that up until very recently was occupying Lebanon and still maintains a grip on the country through Hezbollah and the SSNP, and that regularly assassinates Lebanese leaders that cross the Assad regime. Do we not care about this? I know I do.
And lest anyone accuse me of trying to deflect attention, I would say that first, discussing the faults of other country's in the region need not detract from your discussions of how much you all loath Israel, and second, perhaps we could gain a better understanding of where Israel is coming from if we take a realistic view of who the neighbors it has to deal with actually are.
The situation with Syria is more complex than you make it out to be. Speaking of recent peace discussions, I believe there were reports that Olmert offered Assad the land back in exchange for peace. Then, the israelis voted in Netanyahu before the peace discussions went from indirect (mediated through Turkey) to direct. And we both know what Netanyahu said about the Golan Heights. To remind you in case you forgot "the Golan will remain in our hands". For me at least, that is a strategic way of delaying peace. One administration starts some discussions, then the next says fuck off, then the one after starts from scratch, etc..
With regards to Lebanon, SSNP are a waste of time so there is no point discussing them. The only "grip" they have of the country is the grip on their balls. Perhaps they rose to prominence when Syria was occupying Lebanon but their aspirations have quickly faded after Syria pulled out. You should note that SSNP are Lebanese and not Syrians though. With regards to the assassinations, they have stopped for now (probably due to the better relations between the two countries) but even when they were going on it was believed that rogue elements within the Syrian security services were behind the attacks and not the government itself. Regardless, this is all assumption and nothing has been proven yet. Lets just say that in Lebanon no one would be shocked if they proved the Syrians were behind it but no one would be shocked if they proved Mossad was either. While it is more likely that the Syrians were behind it (be it rogue elements or government), Mossad have done many similar things before. One example would be that of Elie Hobeika. Hariri was a powerful man with friends in high places, killing him was beneficial for both Syria and Israel as weird as that may sound.
With regards to Hizbullah, I think this is one huge discussion that would probably be deserving of its own thread. Because as a zionist, your mention of Hizbullah would probably be in a negative sense but lets not forget that in 2006 the war they fought was much cleaner than the one the IDF did. For a person who quotes targeting military instead of civilians, I would refer you to the number of military vs civilians killed on both sides. I will also note that they are a Lebanese organisation and not Syrian. As for them having control over the country, well I'll just call bullshit on that because I've been there and lived there and they seem to be happy with what they have.
I dont understand how they can "discipline" a war crime with a bad note sticky in their file. That is like a giant middle finger pointed at the Palestinians. No wonder those IDF idiots continue to murder at will.
How much can you tell me about the IDF without first looking anything up?
From just what you have written lately i believe my knowledge is limited to them saving Haitians and abused puppies.
By the way, Alan Desrhowitz is disgrace of a human being. And the fact that he teaches at Harvard despite being found guilty of plagiarism and lying shows just what a sorry state American academia is in.
Leaving aside your comparison, which has nothing to do with anything discussed so far in this thread, NO, they should simply stop lynching people in the street without trial.
Don't let anyone ever accuse you of trying to change the subject Yosi.
By the way, Israel carries out illegal, extra-judicial assassinations which are considered crimes against humanity.
And I wonder what Mordachai Vennunu would make of your high regard for the Israeli justice system?
Saying Hizbollah fought a cleaner war in 2006 kinda overlooks the huge disparity in technology and weapons quality between the two forces. Are you arguing that Hizbollah attempted to avoid killing Israeli non-combatants, or are you just keeping score based on casualties? Hizbollah appeared to be trying to kill as many Israelis as possible. If you want to argue that the onus should have been on Israel to minimize collateral damage, OK. I am going to assume that you are not distorting Hizbollah's motives. They launched as many rockets at civilian areas as they could, and saying that this is "clean" is pretty odd.
Saying Hizbollah fought a cleaner war in 2006 kinda overlooks the huge disparity in technology and weapons quality between the two forces. Are you arguing that Hizbollah attempted to avoid killing Israeli non-combatants, or are you just keeping score based on casualties? Hizbollah appeared to be trying to kill as many Israelis as possible. If you want to argue that the onus should have been on Israel to minimize collateral damage, OK. I am going to assume that you are not distorting Hizbollah's motives. They launched as many rockets at civilian areas as they could, and saying that this is "clean" is pretty odd.
It's actually disturbing how so many people today can justify actual criminal actions on the basis of the supposed "motive" of the other side.
Saying Hizbollah fought a cleaner war in 2006 kinda overlooks the huge disparity in technology and weapons quality between the two forces. Are you arguing that Hizbollah attempted to avoid killing Israeli non-combatants, or are you just keeping score based on casualties? Hizbollah appeared to be trying to kill as many Israelis as possible. If you want to argue that the onus should have been on Israel to minimize collateral damage, OK. I am going to assume that you are not distorting Hizbollah's motives. They launched as many rockets at civilian areas as they could, and saying that this is "clean" is pretty odd.
The huge disparity in technology and weapons quality only makes it worse for the Israelis when you look at the numbers. Guided missiles my ass, unless by guided they mean guided straight to a civilians living room. They seem to have highly sophisticated weapons yet killed 10:1 civilians vs. hizbullah fighters. On the other hand, for a group that is trying so hard to target Israeli civilians, Hizbullah killed 117 IDF and 43 israeli civilians. It doesn't really matter what you want to believe when it comes to motives because its obvious you side with the israelis when it comes to moral high-ground. The numbers say it all and I think that added insult to injury to the israelis in 2006.
Saying Hizbollah fought a cleaner war in 2006 kinda overlooks the huge disparity in technology and weapons quality between the two forces. Are you arguing that Hizbollah attempted to avoid killing Israeli non-combatants, or are you just keeping score based on casualties? Hizbollah appeared to be trying to kill as many Israelis as possible. If you want to argue that the onus should have been on Israel to minimize collateral damage, OK. I am going to assume that you are not distorting Hizbollah's motives. They launched as many rockets at civilian areas as they could, and saying that this is "clean" is pretty odd.
The huge disparity in technology and weapons quality only makes it worse for the Israelis when you look at the numbers. Guided missiles my ass, unless by guided they mean guided straight to a civilians living room. They seem to have highly sophisticated weapons yet killed 10:1 civilians vs. hizbullah fighters. On the other hand, for a group that is trying so hard to target Israeli civilians, Hizbullah killed 117 IDF and 43 israeli civilians. It doesn't really matter what you want to believe when it comes to motives because its obvious you side with the israelis when it comes to moral high-ground. The numbers say it all and I think that added insult to injury to the israelis in 2006.
If you think the numbers say it all, then you completely missed my point about motives. By the way, Lebanese officials estimate around 500 Hizbollah dead, and about 1200 Lebanese civilians (wikipedia). 1200 civilians is deplorable, but that is hardly a 10:1 ratio.
Comments
Once again you extrapolate my opinion on someone cracking a joke about loss of human life to a direct personal attack on you. Perhaps you should crack a joke to make yourself feel better. All in all it was a good attempt at deflecting from the subject matter.
What is "pretty dick" is the Israelis not giving Lebanon the maps for the 1.2 million cluster bomblets they terrorised civilians with. Even after more than 20 civilians were killed from them AFTER the war had ended.
Plus Golan Heights is Syrian after all. If the Israelis did a good job of returning it to them then maybe they could diffuse them themselves. Ever thought of that? or the idea of giving the land back to its rightful owner never crossed your mind?
You seriously believe that a country that had land taken from it should give the occupying country a map of where they put their landmines? That is like a burglar taking my television, dvr, stereo system, and blu ray player and then calling me the next day and asking me how to operate the universal remote for them.
You attempt to flip things around to make the other look evil as a way to validate your argument. That is quite lame.
I didn't think my post was that hard to understand but I guess some people need it broken down for them to grasp it. Please refer me to where my post said it was perfectly alright for the Syrians to refuse israel the maps. I believe my post said, if the israelis were so worried about land mines in the Golan Heights then perhaps they should get the fuck out of there. I'd say that is a very valid way of solving the problem. But both you and I know that Israel does not want to leave some of most fertile land in the region and a great water source.
And once again, this drivel about peace negotiations being refused when the Israelis are always the ones to set conditions that will be automatically refused as a way to fuel their propaganda machine. "We want peace but we wont give you what is yours, in fact we'll take more". I think you zionists should take that up as your official motto.
With regards to cluster bomb munitions the UN requested many times for locations of where they were dropped to have a general idea of where they should be targetting in their sweeps. I'm sure you already knew that but only tried to deflect cause your argument was just drivel.
It would be quite mean of you not to help them out. He'll have to walk all the way to the tv to change the bloody channel
Or perhaps they know israel will use the anti-tank mines o destroy palestinian homes ?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7926413.stm
Human rights investigators say Israeli forces engaged in "wanton destruction" of Palestinian homes during the recent conflict in Gaza.
Amnesty International has told the BBC News website the methods used raised concerns about war crimes.
Israel's military said buildings were destroyed because of military "operational needs".
The Israeli Defense Forces said they operated in accordance with international law during the conflict.
However, the use of mines to destroy homes contradicted this claim, the head of the Amnesty International fact-finding mission to southern Israel and Gaza, Donatella Rovera, has argued.
Israeli troops had to leave their vehicles to plant the mines, indicating that they faced no danger and that there was no military or operational justification, she said.
========
Ms Rovera said her team found fragments of anti-tank mines in and around destroyed properties.
Their use was also consistent with remains of houses, collapsed in on themselves as if blown up from below, rather than destroyed from above as in an airstrike, she said.
Troops would have had to leave their armoured vehicles to plant them and rig up the detonators, she said.
"Unless those operating on the ground felt not just 100% but 200% secure - that the places were not booby trapped, that they wouldn't come under fire - they could not have got out of the vehicles," she said. "They would not have used that method."
"The use of the method tells us even more that there wasn't the kind of danger that might have made it lawful to destroy some of those properties," Ms Rovera said.
=====
Mr Atamna said a UN ordnance clearance team had found several mines in and around the remains of one of the homes.
He said he and his family had fled the area during the Israeli military operation, and returned to find their homes demolished.
Hehehe, no kidding !!
While we've brought up Syria for a second, another question: Why isn't anyone on this thread upset about Syria. This is a country that actively sponsors terrorism, that up until very recently was occupying Lebanon and still maintains a grip on the country through Hezbollah and the SSNP, and that regularly assassinates Lebanese leaders that cross the Assad regime. Do we not care about this? I know I do.
And lest anyone accuse me of trying to deflect attention, I would say that first, discussing the faults of other country's in the region need not detract from your discussions of how much you all loath Israel, and second, perhaps we could gain a better understanding of where Israel is coming from if we take a realistic view of who the neighbors it has to deal with actually are.
Are you Syrian?
Whodunnit
Report: Syria's liaison officer to Hizbullah assassinated / Roee Nahmias
Arab website reports Mohammed Suleiman, who served as Assad's senior advisor, killed by sniper fire over weekend
Full story
"Suleiman was a military engineer by trade. He was surprisingly promoted until he became very close to President Assad. He was suspected of contributing to Hariri's assassination, and due to the ensuing situation he was slowly estranged from all Syrian issues he had formerly commanded except for one – liaison with Hizbullah," al-Hamed said.
When asked why he thought the assassination was masterminded by the government and not an outside source, he said, "The area in which he was killed is surrounded by sensitive military facilities belonging to the Syrian army's intelligence, and it is very well secured. The fact that a sniper shot him is more evidence that the regime did it. The regime's goal is to get rid of anyone who could arrive at an international court and incriminate Assad."
Al-Hamed claimed that the Syrian regime is well-known for using this tactic, and mentioned the case of former Interior Minister Ghazi Canaan, who was found dead in his office in Syria a number of years ago, and who the government claimed had committed suicide.
"We don't know who will be next. It may be a Lebanese opposition figure. I won't even rule out the possibility that the head of intelligence and the president's son in law, Assaf Shawkat, will 'commit suicide' in the future. It's all to do with Hariri," al-Hamed said.
When asked why he thought the Syrian regime had kept quiet over the report, he answered, "Who would they blame? There is no evidence that Israel did it. Why would Israel kill him?"
Regarding reports about Suleiman's involvement in the establishment of Syria's demolished nuclear reactor, al-Hamed said, "I don't think he was connected to it. He was removed over a year ago from all important issues… He was murdered because of the assassination of Rafik al-Hariri. He was part of the inner circle in charge of the assassination. He took care of the logistics."
The difference is that Syria is assassinating Lebanese leaders for nothing more than opposing them, while Israel is assassinating leaders of Hamas because they are terrorists who attack Israel. That is a pretty big difference.
There is no difference - both states are eliminating those who are perceived as threats to their own domination of the region. We could discuss political assassinations in East Timor as well but that really has butkus to do with Israel's war crimes of dropping white phosphorous, does it?
But isn't Hamas opposing Israel?
The situation with Syria is more complex than you make it out to be. Speaking of recent peace discussions, I believe there were reports that Olmert offered Assad the land back in exchange for peace. Then, the israelis voted in Netanyahu before the peace discussions went from indirect (mediated through Turkey) to direct. And we both know what Netanyahu said about the Golan Heights. To remind you in case you forgot "the Golan will remain in our hands". For me at least, that is a strategic way of delaying peace. One administration starts some discussions, then the next says fuck off, then the one after starts from scratch, etc..
With regards to Lebanon, SSNP are a waste of time so there is no point discussing them. The only "grip" they have of the country is the grip on their balls. Perhaps they rose to prominence when Syria was occupying Lebanon but their aspirations have quickly faded after Syria pulled out. You should note that SSNP are Lebanese and not Syrians though. With regards to the assassinations, they have stopped for now (probably due to the better relations between the two countries) but even when they were going on it was believed that rogue elements within the Syrian security services were behind the attacks and not the government itself. Regardless, this is all assumption and nothing has been proven yet. Lets just say that in Lebanon no one would be shocked if they proved the Syrians were behind it but no one would be shocked if they proved Mossad was either. While it is more likely that the Syrians were behind it (be it rogue elements or government), Mossad have done many similar things before. One example would be that of Elie Hobeika. Hariri was a powerful man with friends in high places, killing him was beneficial for both Syria and Israel as weird as that may sound.
With regards to Hizbullah, I think this is one huge discussion that would probably be deserving of its own thread. Because as a zionist, your mention of Hizbullah would probably be in a negative sense but lets not forget that in 2006 the war they fought was much cleaner than the one the IDF did. For a person who quotes targeting military instead of civilians, I would refer you to the number of military vs civilians killed on both sides. I will also note that they are a Lebanese organisation and not Syrian. As for them having control over the country, well I'll just call bullshit on that because I've been there and lived there and they seem to be happy with what they have.
By the way, Alan Desrhowitz is disgrace of a human being. And the fact that he teaches at Harvard despite being found guilty of plagiarism and lying shows just what a sorry state American academia is in.
Don't let anyone ever accuse you of trying to change the subject Yosi.
By the way, Israel carries out illegal, extra-judicial assassinations which are considered crimes against humanity.
And I wonder what Mordachai Vennunu would make of your high regard for the Israeli justice system?
Saying Hizbollah fought a cleaner war in 2006 kinda overlooks the huge disparity in technology and weapons quality between the two forces. Are you arguing that Hizbollah attempted to avoid killing Israeli non-combatants, or are you just keeping score based on casualties? Hizbollah appeared to be trying to kill as many Israelis as possible. If you want to argue that the onus should have been on Israel to minimize collateral damage, OK. I am going to assume that you are not distorting Hizbollah's motives. They launched as many rockets at civilian areas as they could, and saying that this is "clean" is pretty odd.
The huge disparity in technology and weapons quality only makes it worse for the Israelis when you look at the numbers. Guided missiles my ass, unless by guided they mean guided straight to a civilians living room. They seem to have highly sophisticated weapons yet killed 10:1 civilians vs. hizbullah fighters. On the other hand, for a group that is trying so hard to target Israeli civilians, Hizbullah killed 117 IDF and 43 israeli civilians. It doesn't really matter what you want to believe when it comes to motives because its obvious you side with the israelis when it comes to moral high-ground. The numbers say it all and I think that added insult to injury to the israelis in 2006.
If you think the numbers say it all, then you completely missed my point about motives. By the way, Lebanese officials estimate around 500 Hizbollah dead, and about 1200 Lebanese civilians (wikipedia). 1200 civilians is deplorable, but that is hardly a 10:1 ratio.