Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (198502)	8/22/2006 1:11:51 PM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

"If one side is using civilians as body armor then no matter how carefully you take aim at the fighters, you will kill some civilians - the situation has been set up so you can't avoid it. You still have the responsibility to aim as carefully as you can, but you will kill civilians." Message 22644712

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (198502)	8/22/2006 1:37:24 PM
From: geode00	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

Nadine, my contention is that what Israel did is clearly ineffective and detrimental...to Israel. It doesn't solve any problems and creates a host of new ones. Therefore, all of that bombing of Lebanon was simply gratuitous. It's clear that many Israelis think the same thing. As I said before, I was struck by the corporate media's interviewing of rank and file soldiers. They wanted to go home. They wanted to do something else. They weren't gung ho and hell bent on protecting themselves from whatever was out there. The generals OTOH seemed out for blood. Why that disconnect? What did the killing of babies in carriages accomplish for Israel? Where are the kidnapped soldiers? So Israel made clear to the world that Hezbollah rockets can reach into the country. So, now what? Are the rightwingers gleeful that this means Israel can now use nukes? How monstrous is that line of reasoning?