24 Aug 06
The marauder wants to discuss the things that have to be done now regarding the Middle East problems. I chose one of the most pressing problems which is at the focus of attention now: "How to disarm Hezbollah".
Well, marauder, go ahead ..... I am curious to hear from you some proposals to deal with this issue ..... and please don't try to divert attention by demanding Israel should be disarmed as well ...... anybody who feels like it, can jump in of course.
24 Aug 06
Originally posted by ivanhoeI already gave you the solution: integrate the Hezbollah military wing into the Lebanese army.
The marauder wants to discuss the things that have to be done now regarding the Middle East problems. I chose one of the most pressing problems which is at the focus of attention now: "How to disarm Hezbollah".
Well, marauder, go ahead ..... I am curious to hear from you some proposals to deal with this issue ..... and please don't try to divert at ...[text shortened]... ng Israel should be disarmed as well ...... anybody who feels like it, can jump in of course.
And since we're doing "call outs", I'd like to hear your comments on the AI report concerning Israeli war crimes in that thread.
24 Aug 06
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderMarauder: "... integrate the Hezbollah military wing into the Lebanese army."
I already gave you the solution: integrate the Hezbollah military wing into the Lebanese army.
And since we're doing "call outs", I'd like to hear your comments on the AI report concerning Israeli war crimes in that thread.
Apart from the fact that this is not what UNSC resolution 1559 calls for, I would like to ask you the following question:
And how exactly are you going to garantee that it will be the Libanese Prime-Minister or the Minister of Defense and not Hassan Nasrallah who wil be in command of this army within the Lebanese army ?
24 Aug 06
Originally posted by ivanhoeBut if Hezbollah became a part of the Lebanese military they would no longer be a militia.
Marauder: "... integrate the Hezbollah military wing into the Lebanese army."
Apart from the fact that this is not what UNSC resolution 1559 calls for, I would like to ask you the following question:
And how exactly are you going to garantee that it will be the Libanese Prime-Minister or the Minister of Defense and not Hassan Nasrallah who wil be in command of this army within the Lebanese army ?
24 Aug 06
Originally posted by ivanhoeIt would certainly comply with 1559 which states:
Marauder: "... integrate the Hezbollah military wing into the Lebanese army."
Apart from the fact that this is not what UNSC resolution 1559 calls for, I would like to ask you the following question:
And how exactly are you going to garantee that it will be the Libanese Prime-Minister or the Minister of Defense and not Hassan Nasrallah who wil be in command of this army within the Lebanese army ?
# Reaffirms its call for the strict respect of the sovereignty, territorial integrity, unity, and political independence of Lebanon under the sole and exclusive authority of the Government of Lebanon throughout Lebanon;
# Calls upon all remaining foreign forces to withdraw from Lebanon;
# Calls for the disbanding and disarmament of all Lebanese and non- Lebanese militias;
# Supports the extension of the control of the Government of Lebanon over all Lebanese territory;
If Hezbollah is part of the Lebanese military, it is part of the Lebanese government so Lebanon has full control of all its territory, doesn't it?
Who runs the Lebanese military is not the business of the UN.
24 Aug 06
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderThat would then make the whole Lebanese army a terrorist organisation unless hezbollah renounced its intention to wipe out Israel.
It would certainly comply with 1559 which states:
# Reaffirms its call for the strict respect of the sovereignty, territorial integrity, unity, and political independence of Lebanon under the sole and exclusive authority of the Government of Lebanon throughout Lebanon;
# Calls upon all remaining foreign forces to withdraw from Lebanon;
# Calls f ...[text shortened]... erritory, doesn't it?
Who runs the Lebanese military is not the business of the UN.
24 Aug 06
Originally posted by PhilodorIt works for the Israeli army; see the thread concerning the AI report.
That would then make the whole Lebanese army a terrorist organisation. Great solution!
Besides, only the US, Israel and Canada consider Hezbollah a terrorist organization and the first two only think they run the world. And Hezbollah's military wing would be a small part of the Lebanese army.
24 Aug 06
Originally posted by no1marauderHa ha ha .... formal reasoning taken to a whole new level .....
It would certainly comply with 1559 which states:
# Reaffirms its call for the strict respect of the sovereignty, territorial integrity, unity, and political independence of Lebanon under the sole and exclusive authority of the Government of Lebanon throughout Lebanon;
# Calls upon all remaining foreign forces to withdraw from Lebanon;
# Calls f ...[text shortened]... erritory, doesn't it?
Who runs the Lebanese military is not the business of the UN.
It's the "If my Mother in Law had Wheels she would be a Truck" fallacy.
24 Aug 06
Originally posted by ivanhoeWho are the Libanese and what is a garantee?
Ivanhoe: "And how exactly are you going to garantee that it will be the Libanese Prime-Minister or the Minister of Defense and not Hassan Nasrallah who wil be in command of this army within the Lebanese army ?"
Any answer ?
24 Aug 06
Originally posted by ivanhoeTypical nonsense from you. You insist on bringing up SC 1559 (which Israel is violating now BTW) but refuse to look at what it actually says. There is no "fallacy" in actually looking at the wording of a document to see what it requires.
Ha ha ha .... formal reasoning taken to a whole new level .....
It's the "If my Mother in Law had Wheels she would be a Truck" fallacy.
24 Aug 06
Originally posted by ivanhoeI'm pretty sure that's not actually a fallacy. Apart from the whole bit where your argument would claim that anything with wheels is a truck discounting the existance of cars, trains, planes and bicycles.
Ha ha ha .... formal reasoning taken to a whole new level .....
It's the "If my Mother in Law had Wheels she would be a Truck" fallacy.
If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck it's probably not a truck.
24 Aug 06
Originally posted by ivanhoeI already gave it. Here's an expanded version:
Ivanhoe: "And how exactly are you going to garantee that it will be the Libanese Prime-Minister or the Minister of Defense and not Hassan Nasrallah who wil be in command of this army within the Lebanese army ?"
Any answer ?
Who runs the Lebanese military, or any part of the Lebanese military, is not the business of the UN.
24 Aug 06
Originally posted by no1marauderWhy do you think SC resolution calls for Hezbollah's disarmament ?
Typical nonsense from you. You insist on bringing up SC 1559 (which Israel is violating now BTW) but refuse to look at what it actually says. There is no "fallacy" in actually looking at the wording of a document to see what it requires.