Lebanese crisis

[BRUTAL1TY]

Originally Posted by shane32ie

last time I checked the US... just invades and destroys so called 'terroist' countries.

Do you honestly think Iraq isn't better off? Oh and name any other "terrorist" country the US has invaded, destroyed, and captured. Not hearing anything on that one. Iraq was not a terrorist country, but it sure didnt make things easier for the world to be less terrorized. PLus where did all those WMDs go? They were never real? Please... Syria has them, which brings me to my first post stating why Damascus might be destroyed. Israel will escalate things by messing with Syria, Syria then gets involved, things then get WORSE and Syria uses some WMDs and Israel is forced to nuke Damascus. That is just a thought from me as I am guessing the course of how things will happen.

[Enola Bomber]

My belief to the PROPER resolution this this problem and any other problem is to let the people involved sort it out themselves. IT has nothing to do with USA, it has nothing to do with the UN, and it has nothing to do with CANADA even. If we stepped in too, i wouldnt defend my country because i dont agree with whats happening. The problem is so much smaller when it doesnt involve other countries, and it is THEIR problem to solve, not ours. If USA or Canada had a civil war, would we like it if other people stepped in to sort it out? the problem would just get a hell of a lot bigger. This war is as close to a civil war as you can get, and we all should just step back, let them sort it out, and only step in if the problem actually starts involving us.

[BRUTAL1TY]

Originally Posted by Enola Bomber

My belief to the PROPER resolution this this problem and any other problem is to let the people involved sort it out themselves. IT has nothing to do with USA, it has nothing to do with the UN, and it has nothing to do with CANADA even. If we stepped in too, i wouldnt defend my country because i dont agree with whats happening. The problem is so much smaller when it doesnt involve other countries, and it is THEIR problem to solve, not ours. If USA or Canada had a civil war, would we like it if other people stepped in to sort it out? the problem would just get a hell of a lot bigger. This war is as close to a civil war as you can get, and we all should just step back, let them sort it out, and only step in if the problem actually starts involving us.

That is the proper resolution. sadly, it wont happen. This world is blind.

[Enola Bomber]

Just a quick note. People said a political forum was a bad idea. I think this thread alone proved otherwise. People who are older and more educated seem to put up a good debate without going overboard. Its nice to see, and rarely do i see more posts on a thread in such less time. Thank you MATT for letting us have this.

[cablekiller]

Originally Posted by Enola Bomber

Just a quick note. People said a political forum was a bad idea. I think this thread alone proved otherwise. People who are older and more educated seem to put up a good debate without going overboard. Its nice to see, and rarely do i see more posts on a thread in such less time. Thank you MATT for letting us have this.

Here here!

Originally Posted by Enola Bomber

My belief to the PROPER resolution this this problem and any other problem is to let the people involved sort it out themselves. IT has nothing to do with USA, it has nothing to do with the UN, and it has nothing to do with CANADA even. If we stepped in too, i wouldnt defend my country because i dont agree with whats happening. The problem is so much smaller when it doesnt involve other countries, and it is THEIR problem to solve, not ours. If USA or Canada had a civil war, would we like it if other people stepped in to sort it out? the problem would just get a hell of a lot bigger. This war is as close to a civil war as you can get, and we all should just step back, let them sort it out, and only step in if the problem actually starts involving us.

I understand what you're saying, but if the US stepped out and didn't support Israel in this, I believe that would embolden other countries like, Iran and Syria, to involve themselves. It has already been proven that Iran is training and funding the Hezbollah militia against Israel State Sponsors: Iran - Council on Foreign Relations . It may be ugly now, but if the US said to hell with it, I believe it would be even uglier.

[warzin]

All wars are civil wars, because all men are brothers. ~François Fénelon

Should we just leave them to it afterall it's their business?

But if one side has been armed to the teeth by another nation whose business is purely that - business then you have effectively determined the outcome. Should genocide in Rwanda be acceptable because it's people of similar ethnic history? There are no answers just bloodshed. Until we develop a UN that is united in more than words then every interference from outside the conflict has a selfish agenda. Be it Iran or US they don't care about the people but care greatly in causing harm to their perceived enemies.

Also note that Israel believes Iran and Syria to be their real enemies and know that they have proper armies and strong Arab support so it's easier to attack the Lebanon which almost doesn't have an official army. Iran and Syria support murder and Israel and the US support murder because from what I'm reading it's mainly civilians who are being bombed.

[Comical]

We all know the U.S. is going to get involve sooner or later. There is no resolution for eternal enemies. But there may be a slight increase of prosperity and temporary peace if this situation is solved according to both countries, which is not likely to happen.

The U.S. can be rather "inquisitive" with this situation and make a wrong choice if they decide to intrude. If this country gets bomb due to the presidential choice, the citizens, congress or whoever, better impeach the leader.

The U.S. isn't going to sit back and watch damage between to countries increase. We funded multiple countries to have them to be rebuilt under similar circumstances like the one that is currently occurring. There is no doubt that the U.S. will get involved, none-the-less.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enola Bomber
Just a quick note. People said a political forum was a bad idea. I think this thread alone proved otherwise. People who are older and more educated seem to put up a good debate without going overboard. Its nice to see, and rarely do i see more posts on a thread in such less time. Thank you MATT for letting us have this.


Here here!

totally agree.

But i think the UN does have a right to get involved since there plan is on keeping civilians safe, and helping with red-cross and such..
By the way you need to be blind or naive to think that they'er were WMDs in Iraq when the US said so..

All i know is everyone i know and most people in northern europe think Isreal is in the wrong ive always heard Isreal bashing going on and only when i got old enough to actually know what was going on, i agreed completly.
They like i said are too agrresive they started this war and they intend to finish it which will be when lebanon is a wreck and like brutality said when syria get involved.
I hope the US stays out of it because it is none of their buisness unless they want too help with humanitarian needs. It will only get worse with US more guns/soldiers equals more deaths. And dont think the US arent already involved they gave isreal backing and are supplying them with arms.

[Scotracer]

Originally Posted by warzin

All wars are civil wars, because all men are brothers. ~François Fénelon

Should we just leave them to it afterall it's their business?

But if one side has been armed to the teeth by another nation whose business is purely that - business then you have effectively determined the outcome. Should genocide in Rwanda be acceptable because it's people of similar ethnic history? There are no answers just bloodshed. Until we develop a UN that is united in more than words then every interference from outside the conflict has a selfish agenda. Be it Iran or US they don't care about the people but care greatly in causing harm to their perceived enemies.

Also note that Israel believes Iran and Syria to be their real enemies and know that they have proper armies and strong Arab support so it's easier to attack the Lebanon which almost doesn't have an official army. Iran and Syria support murder and Israel and the US support murder because from what I'm reading it's mainly civilians who are being bombed.

I fully agree. Isreal has gone to such extremes because Lebanon really doesn't have an army. This does make it appear that Isreal are bombing only civilians because there is a lack of military targets. Because of the complete one-sided power in this conflict, I feel the UN must unite and actually force the major nations to do something (even though the US loves to disregard them).

Originally Posted by shane32ie

I hope the US stays out of it because it is none of their buisness unless they want too help with humanitarian needs. It will only get worse with US more guns/soldiers equals more deaths. And dont think the US arent already involved they gave isreal backing and are supplying them with arms

Yes, I know of the US and the UK sending their navies to evactuate civilians (only US and UK people though). This could be used for humanitarian means also, which I feel is completely necessary, especially with the breach of UN law that Isreal is doing.

[Gee]

Originally Posted by Enola Bomber

Just a quick note. People said a political forum was a bad idea. I think this thread alone proved otherwise. People who are older and more educated seem to put up a good debate without going overboard. Its nice to see, and rarely do i see more posts on a thread in such less time. Thank you MATT for letting us have this.

I just like to add that I'm pleased that everyone has shown the upmost respect of everyone's views on this subject,so let's keep it that way.
Also we have asked members not to flame other members in this section and this rule does extend to the shoutbox.
Also finally if anyone wishes to start a new thread on a totally different subject,then feel free to do so,it doesn't have to be something that is worldwide,it could be something that is happening in your part of the world.

[Enola Bomber]

For anyone who wants to join in on this topics but doesnt know or isnt aware of the situation, Comcast.net has frequently updated news on this. last update was 14 min ago.

[BRUTAL1TY]

Originally Posted by shane32ie

But i think the UN does have a right to get involved since there plan is on keeping civilians safe, and helping with red-cross and such..
.

I completely agree that they should get involved with keeping civilians safe, I am just merely stating that their success rate isn't amazing when it comes to stabilizing conflicts. But anyways we kind of agree on something shane ... REMARKABLE lol

[Jay2984]

The US will eventually get involved in this in some shape or form BUT what most of you dont realize, or maybe you do, is that when "we" do get involved in something like this we get bashed by some saying we are sticking our nose in other peoples business. On the other hand, when we dont the rest of the world is wondering where we are, where we stand and why arent we doing anything. Our reputation is very shaky right now with what has happened in Iraq and our government cant give terrorist groups anymore excuses to attack our people in this country and in other countries around the world. Its very sad what is happening between Israel and Lebanon, I hope it eventually gets worked out and a cease fire can be agreed upon.

[Glock 19]

Originally Posted by ScotRacer

I fully agree. Isreal has gone to such extremes because Lebanon really doesn't have an army. This does make it appear that Isreal are bombing only civilians because there is a lack of military targets. Because of the complete one-sided power in this conflict, I feel the UN must unite and actually force the major nations to do something (even though the US loves to disregard them).



Yes, I know of the US and the UK sending their navies to evactuate civilians (only US and UK people though). This could be used for humanitarian means also, which I feel is completely necessary, especially with the breach of UN law that Isreal is doing.

I think we should just stick to getting our people out. I was in Somalia in 1992-1993 with U.S. Marines we were doing humanitarian aid and all we did was get shot at, and lose people I don't think it is worth risking American lives or British lives as a situation like Lebannon can go bad quickly as Somalia did. Look for example the bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut in 1983 We were there to help and lost a few hundred people in one bombing. Also my father was there in 1958 with the U.S. Marines also and the place was in kaos then so I don't think there is much anyone can do there anyway. You can't help people unless they help themselves first. So I just say get all of our people out and let them fight it out between themselves IMO.

[Enola Bomber]

Originally Posted by Recon73

I think we should just stick to getting our people out. I was in Somalia in 1992-1993 with U.S. Marines we were doing humanitarian aid and all we did was get shot at, and lose people I don't think it is worth risking American lives or British lives as a situation like Lebannon can go bad quickly as Somalia did. Look for example the bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut in 1983 We were there to help and lost a few hundred people in one bombing. Also my father was there in 1958 with the U.S. Marines also and the place was in kaos then so I don't think there is much anyone can do there anyway. You can't help people unless they help themselves first. So I just say get all of our people out and let them fight it out between themselves IMO.

MY POINT EXACTLY

[Eazy_D]

Peacemaking is a hard, dangerous, and often thankless task. To deter people with guns, other people with more and bigger guns are necessary, and finding such people is not easy. It is one thing to expect a soldier to risk life and limb defending his or her homeland. It is another to expect that same soldier to travel halfway around the world and perhaps to die while trying to quell a struggle over diamonds, oil, or ethnic dominance on someone else's home turf. Most people are simply not that altruistic, especially when they see many intervention forces blamed for what such forces fail to accomplish rather than credited for the burdens they assume. As a result, the world is left with an international system of crisis response that is pragmatic, episodic, and incremental rather than principled, reliable, and decisive.

And the U.K. and U.S. are the people with the bigger guns. The UN is an essential part of worldwide peacekeeping and the sad thing is you dont get to hear about the work they do in such diverse places as Namibia, El Salvador, Cambodia, eastern Slavonia, Mozambique, and Cyprus. The traditional U.N. mission is a confidence-building exercise, conducted in strict neutrality between parties that seek international help in preserving or implementing peace. U.N. peacemaking, however, is quite another matter. The tragic experiences in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Somalia, and Rwanda showed that traditional U.N. peacekeepers lack the mandate, command structure, unity of purpose, and military might to succeed in the more urgent and nasty cases-where the fighting is hot, the innocent are dying, and the combatants oppose an international presence. Such weaknesses, sadly, are inherent in the voluntary and collective nature of the United Nations. When the going gets tough, the tough (U.K. and U.S) tend to go wherever they want, simply because the United Nations cant deal with such critical situations.

[korphaeron]

I'm damn sure if I was Palestinian I would do my best to kill the Israelites. They just took a patch of their land and the whole of the Middle East hates them.

What a coincedence, Israel is bacially USA, and they hate the USA as well!

[Drizzle]

I would like to post my views about this topic...

First of all, we all have to put on the shoes of both sides and try to be as fair and unbiased as possible. Im tired of people calling terrorists anybody who is against the US and/or Israel. Those people are trying to defend their country and families from illegal invasions and invadors. Since they dont have an army and/or resources to fight face to face, they use guerilla tactics. Not everybody in Palestine and Lebanon are terrorists, in fact they are good peaceful people, the bad guys are the brainwashed Islamic fanatics who are promised Heaven to attack the enemy.

Israel is illegally invading Palestine territory and controlling our media, and that is a fact. Israel is doing the same thing terrorists do to them, cause terror in an act of desperation because fighting highly trained guerilla man who are willing to die is hard. The fact that Israel bulldoze (sp?) homes, and ask for documents to move from one place to another is an act of terror. Another thing that I dont like is the excuses they give for the killing of civilians in the Lebanon, humans are not "collateral damage".

The UN is an essential part of worldwide peacekeeping and the sad thing is you dont get to hear about the work they do in such diverse places as Namibia, El Salvador, Cambodia, eastern Slavonia, Mozambique, and Cyprus.

My friend, the UN acts when the US and allies say so. Where