Hezbollah Won against Israel.

Hezbollah won against Israel which was unable in 5 weeks of fighting was unable to defeat Hezbollah by military mean. Israel which is radical antiUN will except the UN Creasefire order to save they faces.

 

If by winning you mean they lost the southern portion of Lebanon, which will soon be occupied by 15000 peace-keeping troops, (none of them Hezbollah) then sure they won. I'm just glad its coming to an end, to many civilian casualties on both sides.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle ... 785001.stm

 

The peacekeeping force willnot do anything. Hezbollah didnot like the Leban Army so they put in the South where Israel will destory it when they next cross the border. Hezbollah will be able to strengthen the hand in the government when they undo the Cerdar Revolt. Hezbollah have some very advange anti-tank weapon from France,Germany,Russia,China,India and USA
which total destory 6 Israel tanks , Israel doesnot to lose they entire Tank Corps in battle.

 

The tactics for defeating Hezbollah were inherently flawed. Any "victory" speaks less about Hezbollah's competance, which is to say they lack any, and more to say about the great abundance of Israeli incompetance.

 

It aint over til the bullets stop flying...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060812/ap_ ... non_israel

 

The whole thing is a tragic farce. What the hell do Israel think they are doing?
It's equivalent to the UK launching missiles at Ireland in order to deal with the IRA.
I wonder how many new Hezbollah recruits Israel has created over the past weeks.
1 missile = 100 dead civilians = 1000 relatives hating Israel even more = % turning into Hezbollah recruits
Seems pretty simple to me but then I never went to military school in Israel.
Well done Israel's military commanders!

Israel have had far too much shelter from America. Without their superpower chum I'm sure they wouldn't have been so bold (and stupid).

 

I wish Isreal would lose 70% of their territory like my country did at the end of WWI.

 

Israel didn't exist (as its own state) in World War One.

 

From what I can tell, Lebanon started the whole mess by kidnapping Israeli troops. They also were the ones firing unguided missles into civilian centers. It looks to me more like self-defense, despite the severity used.

I cant blame them for reacting the way they did due to the fact that the Middle East isn't the friendliest place to live, especially when everyone there wants to kill you. However, both sides were wrong to target civilians and that should be addressed by the UN (which it wont be).

 

Hezbollah kidnapped the soldiers. There is a big difference between a country kidnapping soldiers and a minority terrorist group doing it.

You can't compare Israel and Hezbollah in that manner.
Hezbollah = terrorists.
Israel = legitimate democrat government.

Governments can't go around bombing civilians because there might possibly be terrorists there.

Hezbollah are evil terrorists. Lebanon is guilty of not helping to stamp them out. However this does not give Israel the right to kill civilians who have nothing to do with any of this.
To go back to my earlier comparison: There were / are legitimate political parties in Ireland who support the IRA. But you don't see the UK launching missiles at Ireland in order to make the Irish government change their policy towards the IRA.

 

Déjà vu

 

Hezbollah also have than politcal wing to it which have a strong element into lebanon parltinal and cabinet. Than IRA member into Irishland look like any other Irishman or woman. The Irish police wherenot on friendy term with IRA
as they did some evils act in Northern Irishland. It England have bomb or fired missiles at Irishland they would have lose the little support they have in Irishland against the IRA.

The Islanist Court in Somallia is gaining widespead support in Somalia as they are the first group to bring order out of haveing no government. Even thought they donot like they baning world cup games being watch in Somalia.

 

I'm not listening to anything you say until you tell me where the fuck Irishland is.

 

OK, you know what, Charles, I gave you the benefit of the doubt when you mentioned how you were born with a deficient speech center in your brain.
But, to call a country Irishland is deliberate, derogatory, and bigoted.
It's Ireland.
But, I can agree with your "They look just like us" analogy.
It seems all we're really able to do is try to seperate people from one another.
Here's a crazy solution, how about we tattoo numbers on people according to race, religion, and appearance! Oh, wait, I seem to remember a meth addict in the late thirties doing the exact same thing. *cought*HITLER*cough*
I've grown apathetic towards this whole series of events. These people have been fighting for thousands of years. I say we (the UN) let them deal with it themselves. Yes, it's cold and callous. Do I care? No. As I said, apathetic.

 

Next to Englishland.

 

It's almost impossilbe to "win" a war these days since everything is more complex now then it were a couple of 100 years ago. The Romans invaded a country and started a new gouverment ruled by some high rank/class member of the Romans senate or simliar. If you invade another country now, then the world will look down on you and say "that was bad" * and then they might arm the rebellion groups in the country you invaded or any simliar action.




*of course this "rule" doesn't inclued all coutries. Has anyone stoped China's invasion of Tibet?

 

If you want to "win" a war, simply blow the enemy state to pieces with lots and lots of warheads. You don't have to conquer a land to win a war with them, you simply have to... well, win.

 

Well Irish people live there do they . I didnot call it Hindicland.