Why I am against the UN mission in Lebanon

Eva7Eva7 Posts: 226
edited September 2006 in A Moving Train
The UN mission in Lebanon is, to me, a shame as it has been planned.

1- The UN resolution 1701 fails to condemn the violation of the Lebanon sovereignty, and therefore fails to impose to Israel to leave immediately the Lebanon territory.

2-The UN resolution 1701 and the dispatching of the UN troops is meant to finish the work of the Israeli attack and invasion, i.e. disarming Hezbollah, creating social and political conflicts (a possible second civil war) in Lebanon and keeping the country militarily weak and occupied by foreign countries who have interests in the rebuilding of the Lebanon and the "birth of a new middle east" useful to the western interests.

3- Dispatching UN troops in Lebanon will be funded taking money by social programs of the countries taking part in the mission.

4- Dispatching UN troops in Lebanon without starting clear politics based on the respect of the international sovereignty laws, while keeping on having a UN system unable to impose such sovereignty respect to any country, Israel and US included, won't ever bring peace in the middle east.

5- Dispatching UN troops in lebanon without having civil peace corps able to support the lebanon civil society to build real politics of peace in the middle east won't ever bring peace in the region.

6- Dispatching UN troops in Lebanon without dispatching also troops in Gaza is a joke.

7- Dispatching UN troops in Lebanon without any UN investigation about unexploded mines on the territory, and clear condemnation for the mass destruction weapons used by Israeli (cluster bombs, white phosphorous and devastating new mysterious weapons used that are being investigated, apparently laser or microwave weapons) means that the UN have become a real joke now, that international laws and human rights don't rule anymore, and that the whole world is f***ed up, so, basically, the mission is a joke again.

so, I basically think that this mission, as it is being planned, is not only useless, but dangerous, since it may start conflicts that may involve not only more middle east countries, but all the western world.

On the contrary, if I was wrong, I hope this mission could become a chance to bring the UN again to lead the world scene, assuring peace and sovereignty to all the countries, but only if the UN actions and words will follow the law, and especially if the UN will be ever reformed.
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • darkcrowdarkcrow Posts: 1,102
    i believe it has been confirmed the UN force will not be trying to disarm the militants.

    i guess also you have to see that this force is there more to stop israel than it is to protect lebenon... if that makes sense?

    also on the cluster bombs thing.... a UN official said clearing of the bomblets could take years... also israel said they would contribute money to help the clearing of the weapons.

    on rebuilding lebenon... many middle eastern and western countries have pledged millions. but what really needs to happen is a secure border where neither hezbullah or israel can attack.
  • Eva7Eva7 Posts: 226
    darkcrow wrote:
    i believe it has been confirmed the UN force will not be trying to disarm the militants.

    i guess also you have to see that this force is there more to stop israel than it is to protect lebenon... if that makes sense?

    also on the cluster bombs thing.... a UN official said clearing of the bomblets could take years... also israel said they would contribute money to help the clearing of the weapons.

    on rebuilding lebenon... many middle eastern and western countries have pledged millions. but what really needs to happen is a secure border where neither hezbullah or israel can attack.

    Confirmed or not, the disarm of Hezbollah is written on the UN resolution, while it never mentions the disarm of the Israeli army!

    ...to stop Israel? How? The resolution doesn't mention it.

    If Israel will really contribute for the clearing, that doesn't mean that Israel is acquitted of war crimes and of the killing of more 100.000 civilians by mainly using WMD.
  • MrBrianMrBrian Posts: 2,672
    Israel is in a great strategic position right now and they know it, they are just one dead UN soldier away from their goal.
  • Eva7 wrote:
    On the contrary, if I was wrong, I hope this mission could become a chance to bring the UN again to lead the world scene, assuring peace and sovereignty to all the countries, but only if the UN actions and words will follow the law, and especially if the UN will be ever reformed.

    I'm also in favor of UN leadership, but it'll never have any legitimacy in my mind as long as the permanent members have veto power. To get any one of those nations to give up that power is next to impossible.
  • darkcrowdarkcrow Posts: 1,102
    Eva7 wrote:
    Confirmed or not, the disarm of Hezbollah is written on the UN resolution, while it never mentions the disarm of the Israeli army!

    ...to stop Israel? How? The resolution doesn't mention it.

    If Israel will really contribute for the clearing, that doesn't mean that Israel is acquitted of war crimes and of the killing of more 100.000 civilians by mainly using WMD.

    the americans would never let the UN do anything against israel. stupid veto.... one of the reasons why the people of sudan were/are left to be massacared.
  • Eva7Eva7 Posts: 226
    darkcrow wrote:
    the americans would never let the UN do anything against israel. stupid veto.... one of the reasons why the people of sudan were/are left to be massacared.

    I agree. That's why I wrote what I wrote.
  • MrBrianMrBrian Posts: 2,672
    to add to what I said, if one UN soldier get's killed by a hezbollah fighter, it'll turn the world against hezbollah and towards israels side, israel knows that, weather of not they try to incite hezbollah into doing something crazy or even frame them is something that I worry about.

    Isreal is in a very good position right now.
  • Hi, Eva ... While I too have some issues with the UN deployment, I do not agree with many of your specific criticisms. You seem to think that disarming and/or destroying Hezbollah is a problem, whereas I do not. How would disarming Hezbollah lead to a civil war? If anything, their presence increases the likelihood not just of strife between Lebanese, but also of another Israeli attack. Hezbollah do not deserve your sympathy. Their stupid actions got Lebanon destroyed. As usual, no good comes of terrorism, even when it masquerades as resistence.
  • Hi, Eva ... While I too have some issues with the UN deployment, I do not agree with many of your specific criticisms. You seem to think that disarming and/or destroying Hezbollah is a problem, whereas I do not. How would disarming Hezbollah lead to a civil war? If anything, their presence increases the likelihood not just of strife between Lebanese, but also of another Israeli attack. Hezbollah do not deserve your sympathy. Their stupid actions got Lebanon destroyed. As usual, no good comes of terrorism, even when it masquerades as resistence.

    Was it an act of terrorism that "started" the recent violence?
  • Human Tide wrote:
    Was it an act of terrorism that "started" the recent violence?

    What do you mean? The last Israeli attack on Lebanon? If so, absolutely.
  • What do you mean? The last Israeli attack on Lebanon? If so, absolutely.

    Kidnapping soldiers is an act of terrorism? That's interesting. How do you define terrorism?
  • Human Tide wrote:
    Kidnapping soldiers is an act of terrorism? That's interesting. How do you define terrorism?

    Hmmm ... Debatable. Kidnapping was the catalyst, but I think the rocket attacks were what caused such a huge Israeli response. Which fit the definition to a tee.
  • Hmmm ... Debatable. Kidnapping was the catalyst, but I think the rocket attacks were what caused such a huge Israeli response. Which fit the definition to a tee.

    Go back and look at the timeline of events again.
  • Human Tide wrote:
    Go back and look at the timeline of events again.

    To clarify, I'm implying that the few rockets/mortars fired at the time of the abduction were clearly not the major event. As for the many rockets fired subsequently, they came after Israel began the major attacks.

    Israel's actions must be seen in the larger context of the conflict. This war was not about a few soldiers or a few rockets.
  • Eva7Eva7 Posts: 226
    Hi, Eva ... While I too have some issues with the UN deployment, I do not agree with many of your specific criticisms. You seem to think that disarming and/or destroying Hezbollah is a problem, whereas I do not. How would disarming Hezbollah lead to a civil war? If anything, their presence increases the likelihood not just of strife between Lebanese, but also of another Israeli attack. Hezbollah do not deserve your sympathy. Their stupid actions got Lebanon destroyed. As usual, no good comes of terrorism, even when it masquerades as resistence.

    Hi dearest, sorry for being so late!

    I totally agree that Hezbollah didn't do good and are accountable for the israeli attacks which destroyed the country. That said, Hezbollah was and is still the only force in Lebanon able to defend the country, and they have the highest support in Lebanon. I am for the disarming of all the world, not only Hezbollah and Israel. But the UN resolution is only for the Hezbollah disarming, this is what I don't support. Israel attacked, destroyed and occupied a sovereign country, Lebanon, and you can't find one only mention to this very fact in the UN resolution. And you can't find one only mention in the resolution about the fact that the UN mission should be aimed at disarming BOTH Israel and Hezbollah, and that Israel MUST leave southern Lebanon. I read this as a clear international political action mainly supporting the Israel goals in the area. I also think that this whole UN mission is a big trap that will be used by Israel and the US for their own purposes, included a possible war against Iran. Thanks to this UN mission, a massive US military force is being dispatched in locations useful for a possible attack to Iran, including two aircrafts, 5 warships, 75 fighters and thousands Marines.
  • jsandjsand Posts: 646
    Eva7 wrote:
    Hi dearest, sorry for being so late!

    I totally agree that Hezbollah didn't do good and are accountable for the israeli attacks which destroyed the country. That said, Hezbollah was and is still the only force in Lebanon able to defend the country, and they have the highest support in Lebanon. I am for the disarming of all the world, not only Hezbollah and Israel. But the UN resolution is only for the Hezbollah disarming, this is what I don't support. Israel attacked, destroyed and occupied a sovereign country, Lebanon, and you can't find one only mention to this very fact in the UN resolution. And you can't find one only mention in the resolution about the fact that the UN mission should be aimed at disarming BOTH Israel and Hezbollah, and that Israel MUST leave southern Lebanon. I read this as a clear international political action mainly supporting the Israel goals in the area. I also think that this whole UN mission is a big trap that will be used by Israel and the US for their own purposes, included a possible war against Iran. Thanks to this UN mission, a massive US military force is being dispatched in locations useful for a possible attack to Iran, including two aircrafts, 5 warships, 75 fighters and thousands Marines.

    Why shouldn't it support Israel? You fail to mention that Israel's sovereignty was violated as its soldiers were captured and killed, and it was bombarded with rockets. Of course it attacked Lebanon - Lebanon, whether tacit or complicit, permitted Hezbollah to operate in the south and obtain thousands of Iranian rockets. Hezbollah has the stated intent of destroying Israel. And you wonder why the UN resolution supports Israel?
  • Eva7Eva7 Posts: 226
    jsand wrote:
    Why shouldn't it support Israel? You fail to mention that Israel's sovereignty was violated as its soldiers were captured and killed, and it was bombarded with rockets. Of course it attacked Lebanon - Lebanon, whether tacit or complicit, permitted Hezbollah to operate in the south and obtain thousands of Iranian rockets. Hezbollah has the stated intent of destroying Israel. And you wonder why the UN resolution supports Israel?

    The kidnapping of soldiers does not make a sovereignity violation, but a different crime. Israel has illegaly occupied southern Lebanon for many years, and there are UN resolutions against that, which Israel has always violated. Hezbollah were born to defend Lebanon during the former occupation by Israel, and their purpose is to defend Lebanon. No, I don't wonder why the UN resolution supports Israel, I just blame it. A UN resolution is supposed to support a country's sovereignity, not the violator of one country's sovereignity. Rockets from Hezbollah? 100.000 lebanese civilians have been killed, all the lebanese highways, bridges, civilian infrastructures and towns have been utterly destoyed, rescue and aid groups have been targeted and killed, and you're still talking of Hezbollah rockets? pretty funny to me.
  • So will the UN fire back on Israel if they go against the rules of this engagement....
  • jsandjsand Posts: 646
    Eva7 wrote:
    The kidnapping of soldiers does not make a sovereignity violation, but a different crime. Israel has illegaly occupied southern Lebanon for many years, and there are UN resolutions against that, which Israel has always violated. Hezbollah were born to defend Lebanon during the former occupation by Israel, and their purpose is to defend Lebanon. No, I don't wonder why the UN resolution supports Israel, I just blame it. A UN resolution is supposed to support a country's sovereignity, not the violator of one country's sovereignity. Rockets from Hezbollah? 100.000 lebanese civilians have been killed, all the lebanese highways, bridges, civilian infrastructures and towns have been utterly destoyed, rescue and aid groups have been targeted and killed, and you're still talking of Hezbollah rockets? pretty funny to me.

    Pretty funny to me is how you have no grasp of the facts.

    1. Israel wasn't occupying any part of Lebanon prior to the start of the recent hostilities. If you're referring to Shebaa farms, that is purportedly Syria's

    2. How, exactly, is the kidnapping of soldiers on Israel's own side of the border not a violation of Israel's sovereignty? Or do you just believe that Israel doesn't have any sovereinty, which is belied by this nonsense:

    3. "100.000 lebanese civilians have been killed, all the lebanese highways, bridges, civilian infrastructures and towns have been utterly destoyed, rescue and aid groups have been targeted and killed." Really? All the Lebanese highways, bridges, etc. have been destroyed? How did you gather that information? From watching the same clips of one area of Lebanon displayed over and over again on CNN? And where are you getting the 100,000 casualty figure? And please show me the proof of rescue and aid workers being targeted. Please refute this detailed report debunking one of the most recent blood libels against the Jews:

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

    Keep trying.
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Human Tide wrote:
    Was it an act of terrorism that "started" the recent violence?


    when they kidnapped 2 soliders for no reason.
  • El_KabongEl_Kabong Posts: 4,141
    jlew24asu wrote:
    when they kidnapped 2 soliders for no reason.

    what was it when israel kidnappd 2 civilians, including a doctor?

    what is it when israel bulldozes down homes to build more ILLEGAL settlements?
    standin above the crowd
    he had a voice that was strong and loud and
    i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
    eager to identify with
    someone above the crowd
    someone who seemed to feel the same
    someone prepared to lead the way
  • Eva7Eva7 Posts: 226
    jsand wrote:
    Pretty funny to me is how you have no grasp of the facts.

    1. Israel wasn't occupying any part of Lebanon prior to the start of the recent hostilities. If you're referring to Shebaa farms, that is purportedly Syria's

    2. How, exactly, is the kidnapping of soldiers on Israel's own side of the border not a violation of Israel's sovereignty? Or do you just believe that Israel doesn't have any sovereinty, which is belied by this nonsense:

    3. "100.000 lebanese civilians have been killed, all the lebanese highways, bridges, civilian infrastructures and towns have been utterly destoyed, rescue and aid groups have been targeted and killed." Really? All the Lebanese highways, bridges, etc. have been destroyed? How did you gather that information? From watching the same clips of one area of Lebanon displayed over and over again on CNN? And where are you getting the 100,000 casualty figure? And please show me the proof of rescue and aid workers being targeted. Please refute this detailed report debunking one of the most recent blood libels against the Jews:

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

    Keep trying.

    1- I wasn't talking of prior the start of the recent hostility, but of the occupation of "security strip" by Israel for years until 2000, in response of your supposition that Hezbollah's aim is to destroy Israel
    2- because the Hezbollah didn't attack or invade Israel
    3 - Pretty much all news given worldwide by the media... but sorry, you're right because I did a mistake, I wrote 100,000 instead of 1,000 (I mistook it with the Iraq war!). forgive me, but does it make a big difference to you? And yes, pretty much all the lebanese infrastructures have been destroyed.
    CNN? we don't see it in Italy.
    some sources:

    Attacks on civilian convoys in the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict
    http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/aug2006/2006-08-07-05.asp
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Marjayoun_convoy
    http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE180072006
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attacks_on_civilian_convoys_in_the_2006_Israel-Lebanon_conflict
    http://www.rte.ie/news/2006/0804/lebanon2.html
    http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L11459020.htm

    Civilian casualties
    http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2006/08/10/lebano13955.htm
    http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2006/08/08/lebano13939.htm

    Infrastructures (highways, bridges, hospitals, electric power, water):
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5303410.stm
    http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=10730
    http://www.refintl.org/content/article/detail/9328?PHPSESSID=447d33c54a95ba9
    http://gdaeman.blogspot.com/2006/08/lebanon-damage-roads-and-bridges.html
    http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article5689.shtml
    http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article5683.shtml
    http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-08-07-lebanon-damage_x.htm
    http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/IRIN/1b19e8f4c647f4d817e445f121fd43fe.htm
    http://www.focusweb.org/content/view/1023/93/

    Also, add that the israeli bombing of an electricity power station at Jiyeh had cause a big oil spill of between 10,000 and 15,000 tons of heavy fuel oil spilled into the Mediterranean Sea, a huge black sea threatening the coastal waters of Syria, Turkey, Cipro and Italy. Italy sent a team of experts in the area that will costs millions to my country. Reply this: why isn't Israel paying for all this in any way?
    http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/aug2006/2006-08-08-01.asp
    http://uruknet.info/?p=m26201
    http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/IRIN/ba635e90191e825188f08bc479ff0768.htm
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/08/07/wmid607.xml
    http://www.moroccotimes.com/news/article.asp?id=16986
    http://dahrjamailiraq.com/weblog/archives/lebanon/000449.php
  • Eva7Eva7 Posts: 226
    jlew24asu wrote:
    when they kidnapped 2 soliders for no reason.

    The hidden story of Lebanese prisoners held in Israeli jails

    Israel claims its war on Lebanon was triggered by Hizbollah’s capture of two Israeli soldiers, and says it holds only two Lebanese prisoners.

    Yet a secret list compiled by the Lebanese authorities, and leaked to the Lebanese newspaper al-Safir, has revealed the names of 67 men known to have been kidnapped by Israel and its allies during 18 years of occupation. Thousands of others are missing.

    The most high profile prisoner in Israel is Samir Kuntar, who is serving a life sentence. Kuntar was captured by Israel in 1979 during an operation by a left wing Palestinian group. He was 16 at the time.

    Kuntar has been kept out of prisoner exchanges until the Lebanese find the remains of an Israeli air force pilot downed in 1986. The Lebanese have repeatedly stated that the pilot is just one of 17,000 people who went missing over decades of war.

    Hizbollah has demanded Kuntar be released in exchange for Israeli soldiers. The resistance is also demanding the return of hundreds of others held secretly by Israel.

    The leaked list names those who were witnessed being seized and then identified as having been transferred to Israeli prisons. The majority were seized by Israeli troops or their allies, the right wing Lebanese Forces and Israel’s proxy South Lebanese Army (SLA).

    The list gives the dates and locations where the men were seized, followed by verification either by witnesses or newspaper photographs of prisoners.

    There is no reason given as to why the men were seized, or whether they are alive or dead. The Israelis have refused to discuss the list, and have given no details on the missing people’s whereabouts, or the locations of their graves.

    Those campaigning for the families of the missing fear they were tortured, then killed inside Israel.

    There are hopes that some of them might still be alive. Many would now be in their 40s. Of the 67 who have been verified as having been transferred to Israel, 43 were in their early 20s or younger.

    In the wake of the 1978 and 1982 Israeli invasions of Lebanon, right wing militias stalked the country seizing young men. They would often disappear without trace, joining the tens of thousands of other victims.

    However in some cases witnesses logged details of kidnappings with the Lebanese authorities, and in other cases former militiamen provided secret testimony to the committee that shed light on a policy of transferring captives to Israel.

    Fifty five year old Shakeen Asaad was seized at a checkpoint near the Shatilla Palestinian refugee camp in south Beirut in 1982. Nothing was heard of him until his wife identified him in a newspaper photograph. He was one of a group of blindfolded prisoners being marched across the southern border.

    In one case, a father and his three sons were kidnapped and transferred.

    All the kidnappings follow a similar pattern. Men were seized at checkpoints run by right wing militias, taken either to a military jail or the ministry of defence before being transferred to Israel.

    There is no evidence that any of the men were members of left wing parties or nationalist groups. The pattern of abductions was random, in the majority of cases they were stopped by chance.

    After the Israelis seized west Beirut in 1982, they handed over control to their allies who took over the Lebanese government. This government was later overthrown in 1984 by an uprising. The only remaining force that remained allied to the US and Israel was the SLA.

    The SLA ran a torture centre and prison camp in the southern village of Khiam. The prison, which was recently destroyed by Israeli bombs, was filled with those who resisted the occupation of the south. Its prisoners were liberated when crowds stormed the prison as Israeli troops abandoned their positions in 2000.

    Yet many remain unaccounted for. The list of names included many young men taken between 1982 and 1989 as Israelis attempted to coerce young men into the SLA. Those who refused were either beaten or killed.

    Fahd Abdel Kareem Bazi, 18, was seized by Israeli troops in March 1985. It is believed he was taken to Israel. There has been no word of him since. Whether he was executed, died under torture or is rotting in an Israeli dungeon is unknown. The Israelis have refused to release any information or cooperate with any investigation.

    In the case of 19 year old Mohammad Ali Hawa, his mother was able to visit him in a local jail after he was seized in the southern town of Jezine by the SLA in 1984. He was transferred to another prison inside Israel shortly after and has not been heard of since.

    The campaign by the families of the missing has embarrassed the Lebanese government. Protests by the families were often attacked by interior ministry police.

    Hizbollah, among others, made a pledge to the families that they would try and free the prisoners. This is one reason why they seized two Israeli soldiers. Yet it is the fate of two soldiers, rather than the hundreds and possibly thousands of Lebanese and Arab prisoners, that makes the headlines.

    The truth lies somewhere inside Israel’s prisons.

    http://www.uruknet.info/?s1=1&p=25873&s2=19
  • So will the UN fire back on Israel if they go against the rules of this engagement....

    The chances of Israeli troops attacking UN troops are nearly nil.
  • Human Tide wrote:
    Israel's actions must be seen in the larger context of the conflict. This war was not about a few soldiers or a few rockets.

    Which is a more subtle way of saying that "Israel is the only problem here". And you know I disagree with that.
  • Which is a more subtle way of saying that "Israel is the only problem here". And you know I disagree with that.

    That's a bunch of bullshit and you know it. I don't express my opinion by dancing around it with subtleties. If I thought Israel was the only problem, I would say it.
  • The problem is Israeli policy:

    'The basic tendency of Israeli policy and people is to solve problems by means of force as the be-all and end-all rather than trying diplomatic and political solutions' and to view borders with neighboring Arab states as 'nothing but a function of power relations.' Boas Evron
    Ze'ev Sternhell argues that a Zionist tenet is 'never giving up a position or a territory unless one is compelled by superior force.' (Finkelstein xxxiii-xxxiv)
  • MrBrianMrBrian Posts: 2,672
    The chances of Israeli troops attacking UN troops are nearly nil.

    But the chances of them attacking UN troops and putting blame on hezbollah are very high.

    They did attack US troops before and blame egypt, they also used terrorism, hitting civilian targets and then blame another country for the attack so the world would side with israel.

    So they have a history of doing such things. Why would they not try it again? It's exactly what they need right now.

    (the Lavon Affair to start off with)
  • MrBrian wrote:
    But the chances of them attacking UN troops and putting blame on hezbollah are very high.

    They did attack US troops before and blame egypt, they also used terrorism, hitting civilian targets and then blame another country for the attack so the world would side with israel.

    So they have a history of doing such things. Why would they not try it again? It's exactly what they need right now.

    (the Lavon Affair to start off with)

    Why would they need to antagonize Europe and the U.S. right now, exactly? The former in particular ...
  • MrBrianMrBrian Posts: 2,672
    Why would they need to antagonize Europe and the U.S. right now, exactly? The former in particular ...

    well not really antagonize europe, because israel would want to do this without the world knowing that they (israel) did it.

    Right now most of the world has a negative view of israel because of (in particular)their actions in lebanon, but if hezbollah were to attack UN soldiers, imagine, israel would be able to say "see, look what they do!" .

    So a great strategic move for israel would be to attack the UN forces and blame it on hezbollah, a style of fighting they are historically known for.
Sign In or Register to comment.