12 Aug 06
1 edit
Despite the passage of a UN Security Council Resolution calling for, among other things, a cessation of Israel's "offensive operations" in Lebanon, the Israelis bombed a number of civilian targets including power stations and expanded their ground offensive in Lebanon. Their generals stated they expected to continue their operations for at least a week despite the Security Council resolution. This is nothing new; Israel is in violation of over 60 previous UN Security Council Resolutions.
The resolution itself is a farce failing to condemn Israel's aggression and giving the Israelis everything they asked for. Still they refuse to comply with it. When will this criminal state be held accountable for its blatant breaches of international law?
For the sickening details including a bombing of a civilian convoy under the supposed "protection" of the UN, see http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14315126/
12 Aug 06
Originally posted by no1marauderBut we already knew that the UN is a farce.
Despite the passage of a UN Security Council Resolution calling for, among other things, a cessation of Israel's "offensive operations" in Lebanon, the Israelis bombed a number of civilian targets including power stations and expanded their ground offensive in Lebanon. Their generals stated they expected to continue their operations for at least a week d ...[text shortened]... onvoy under the supposed "protection" of the UN, see http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14315126/
12 Aug 06
Originally posted by no1marauderBut how are you going to hold them responsible when they don't listen to you?
Despite the passage of a UN Security Council Resolution calling for, among other things, a cessation of Israel's "offensive operations" in Lebanon, the Israelis bombed a number of civilian targets including power stations and expanded their ground offensive in Lebanon. Their generals stated they expected to continue their operations for at least a week d ...[text shortened]... onvoy under the supposed "protection" of the UN, see http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14315126/
That's the dilemma.
And that's why I wrote: Angry young man
(which I will re-write in a better form when my hands stop hurting)
12 Aug 06
Originally posted by no1marauderI suppose they had better watch out. If Saddam violated some resolutions, and Israel have disregarded over 60, it means that the just forces that went and imposed 'regime change' in thaty dangerous state will surely be heading for Israel any day now...😕
Despite the passage of a UN Security Council Resolution calling for, among other things, a cessation of Israel's "offensive operations" in Lebanon, the Israelis bombed a number of civilian targets including power stations and expanded their ground offensive in Lebanon. Their generals stated they expected to continue their operations for at least a week d ...[text shortened]... onvoy under the supposed "protection" of the UN, see http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14315126/
12 Aug 06
Originally posted by no1marauderAbout the same time Hezbollah will adhere to the UN resolutions.
Despite the passage of a UN Security Council Resolution calling for, among other things, a cessation of Israel's "offensive operations" in Lebanon, the Israelis bombed a number of civilian targets including power stations and expanded their ground offensive in Lebanon. Their generals stated they expected to continue their operations for at least a week d ...[text shortened]... onvoy under the supposed "protection" of the UN, see http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14315126/
12 Aug 06
Originally posted by no1marauderhttp://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=19497&Cr=Leban&Cr1=
Despite the passage of a UN Security Council Resolution calling for, among other things, a cessation of Israel's "offensive operations" in Lebanon, the Israelis bombed a number of civilian targets including power stations and expanded their ground offensive in Lebanon. Their generals stated they expected to continue their operations for at least a week d ...[text shortened]... onvoy under the supposed "protection" of the UN, see http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14315126/
"In a speech to last night's Council meeting, Secretary-General Kofi Annan said he would be working with Israel and Lebanon this weekend to establish “the exact date and time at which the cessation of hostilities will come into effect.”
12 Aug 06
3 edits
Originally posted by no1marauderMarauder, since you do not mention the Hezbollah actions I'll post the following in order to restore the necessary balance:
Despite the passage of a UN Security Council Resolution calling for, among other things, a cessation of Israel's "offensive operations" in Lebanon, the Israelis bombed a number of civilian targets including power stations and expanded their ground offensive in Lebanon. Their generals stated they expected to continue their operations for at least a week d onvoy under the supposed "protection" of the UN, see http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14315126/
" .... reported that military situation in the south of the country “for the most part has remained unchanged in the past 24 hours” with fighting between Hizbollah and the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) continuing “with same intensity” as before.
"There were four other incidents of firing from the Israeli side close to UN positions in the areas causing material damage but no casualties, according to UNIFIL, which reported that Hizbollah also fired rockets from the vicinity of UN positions. As it has repeatedly in recent weeks, UNIFIL strongly protested all the incidents to the Israeli and Lebanese authorities respectively."
As I showed above in a previous post, there cannot possibly be a breach by either side of the Security Council resolution or the cease-fire the resolution has called for, since there is not an agreement yet on when exactly the cessation of hostilities will come into effect.
Again, as the facts show, you are much too eager in accusing and condemning one side in the conlict, Mr. Lawyer.
12 Aug 06
Originally posted by slimjimAgreed. No one wanted any enforcement of resolutions in Iraq. When the U.S. and England and the rest of the coalition decided the resolutions needed enforcing, everyone made a big stink about it. So we've learned our lesson. Better to just stay out of it since war is bad. The U.N. can handle it on their own by passing a few more resolutions about breaking their resolutions.
About the same time Hezbollah will adhere to the UN resolutions.
12 Aug 06
1 edit
Originally posted by ivanhoeWhat do these words mean to you "Calls for a full cessation of hostilities based upon, in particular, the immediate cessation by Hizbollah of all attacks and the immediate cessation by Israel of all offensive military operations;"
Marauder, since you do not mention the Hezbollah actions I'll post the following in order to restore the necessary balance:
" .... reported that military situation in the south of the country “for the most part has remained unchanged in the past 24 hours” with [b/]fighting between Hizbollah and the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) continuing “with same intensi show, you are much too eager in accusing and condemning one side in the conlict, Mr. Lawyer.
Note the word "immediate".
12 Aug 06
Originally posted by ivanhoeFrom your link:
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=19497&Cr=Leban&Cr1=
"In a speech to last night's Council meeting, Secretary-General Kofi Annan said he would be working with Israel and Lebanon this weekend to establish “the exact date and time at which the cessation of hostilities will come into effect.”
The effort to help civilians caught in the crossfire continued to be severely hampered by Israeli military operations and overall insecurity. “UNIFIL's freedom of movement and the ability to re-supply positions and provide humanitarian assistance were denied because of the lack of security clearance from the IDF and due to the intensive hostilities on the ground,” the mission said in a press release.
A humanitarian convoy to distribute food to the villages in the western sector, and other humanitarian activities planned by UNIFIL, could not proceed in the last six days due to the denial of consent by the IDF. The IDF also still not responded to the repeated requests by UNIFIL to reopen the road between Tyre and Beirut by putting up another provisional bridge over the Litani River in a bid to facilitate the delivery of aid to beleaguered civilians in the south.
Israel continues to wage war against the civilian population of Lebanon. These are war crimes and crimes against humanity.
12 Aug 06
See http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14315126/
In response to the UN Security Council Resolution which called for an "immediate" end to hostilities, Israel tripled its number of ground troops in Lebanon and planned to push about 20 miles into Lebanon to the Litani River. This is a blatant breach of the terms of the resolution and was clearly intended to be so.
12 Aug 06
Originally posted by no1marauder😴😴😴😴😴😴😴😴😴😴😴😴
From your link:
The effort to help civilians caught in the crossfire continued to be severely hampered by Israeli military operations and overall insecurity. “UNIFIL's freedom of movement and the ability to re-supply positions and provide humanitarian assistance were denied because of the lack of security clearance from the IDF and due to the ...[text shortened]... r against the civilian population of Lebanon. These are war crimes and crimes against humanity.
- Joined
- 21 Jul 06
- Moves
- 94140
12 Aug 06
Originally posted by no1marauderBut the Israelis have to act in a way that they percieve is best for Israel, whether we agree with it or not. If they believe that the resolution could end up creating long term problems (too small a word), then they can not agree with it.
See http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14315126/
In response to the UN Security Council Resolution which called for an "immediate" end to hostilities, Israel tripled its number of ground troops in Lebanon and planned to push about 20 miles into Lebanon to the Litani River. This is a blatant breach of the terms of the resolution and was clearly intended to be so.