| Submit your comments on this article |
| Israel-Palestine-Jordan |
| Annan: IDF activity violates cease-fire resolution |
| 2006-08-20 |
| UN Secretary General Kofi Annan announced Saturday night that the IDF activities in Baalbek, in the Bekaa valley in southern Lebanon, constitute a violation of the UN cease-fire resolution that went into effect on Monday, CNN reported. Earlier, UN Middle East envoy Terje Roed-Larsen said that "if what was reported is true, this is a clear violation of the cease-fire." |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #18 The UN needs to be closed. |
| Posted by: SR-71 2006-08-20 22:50 |
| #17 All that Kofi lacks are some swastika armbands. His anti-Semitism could not be more blatant nor his appeasement of terrorism. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-08-20 20:38 |
| #16 I fear you may be right, AP. |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-08-20 14:45 |
| #15 This cease-fire (inappropriate term) is a disaster for Israel. It is a simple negation of any progress that Israel has made in the destruction of Hizb'Allah. This whole fiasco can be laid at the feet of Olmert and Peretz. Their version of half-way war has strengthened their enemy. There were NO consequences for Hizb'Allah's Syrian and Iranian enablers. NONE. Before this Hizb'Allah/Iran problem can be solved, Israel needs to deal with the Olmert/Peretz disaster. I hope for Isreal's sake that the Israel citizens can do this quickly. Time is of the essance. The world is putting off the inevitable by this farce of a cease-fire. There WILL be a confrontation with Iran. This IS WW2 all over again, when the great powers did not call Hitler's bluff. I feel Wrechard's Three Conjectures coming on. And I am not joking about this. |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul back home 2006-08-20 14:39 |
| #14 Seems that IDF are following the terms of 1701. It would appear that Kofi and crew are in violation. Violation by Inaction. But projection is a standard reaction from this do nothing crowd. |
| Posted by: john 2006-08-20 12:45 |
| #13 "Kofi Annan" is a synonym for "irrelevant". "Diplomacy" that is not a "win-win" is irrelevant, and there can be no win-win when one side denies the other's right to exist. |
| Posted by: Darrell 2006-08-20 11:36 |
| #12 Lebanon already broke the ceasefire on many, many occasions. Rocket fire is not a violation, Kofi? Scirmishes? How bout YOU, Kofi. YOU are a violation. What was gotten here with your UN-Organization? No Israeli Hostages released, Hiz is still not disarmed, Hiz wants to kidnap More Soldiers, the fusing of Hezbollah with the Lebanese Army. Your basic CF wrapped up in UN human shields that are not even formed yet. I AM watching you Constantly condemn .01% of the worlds population while you preside over genocide in Sudan. |
| Posted by: newc 2006-08-20 05:49 |
| #11 Freedom |
| Posted by: 6 2006-08-20 05:48 |
| #10 Having nothing left to lose is a powerful thing. It can be "liberating"! :-) |
| Posted by: gorb 2006-08-20 01:52 |
| #9 Israel didn't need or want your fucking ceasefire farce in the first place, you megalomaniacal self-important fuckwit. Take your putrid corrupt scam artists and feckless gaggle of dictators and fuck off. If any of the Lebs or your tools sticks their nose out of their redoubts, expect to have it shot off. This is a setup, a slow-motion ambush. Fuck it. No dice, bitch. Take your clowns and hie thee back to the circus. All bets are off. Having nothing left to lose is a powerful thing. |
| Posted by: flyover 2006-08-20 01:48 |
| #8 Well #6 -- you just about summed it up -- prevent the entry in Lebanon without its consent of arms or related materiel As I read this UN mandate, Lebanon has to give its consent for arms or related materials to enter its country. Well... Lebanon is giving its consent with the stance its government has adopted in the last 24 hours. On to the next resolution. Saddam had 17 -- take one down, pass it all around, 15 bottles of resolutions on the wall. |
| Posted by: Sherry 2006-08-20 01:06 |
| #7 Next time we want any wisdom from you Koffee, we'll beat you over the head. Until then, STFU. |
| Posted by: SOP35/Rat 2006-08-20 01:03 |
| #6 More 1701 language... 14. Calls upon the government of Lebanon to secure its borders and other entry points to prevent the entry in Lebanon without its consent of arms or related materiel and requests Unifil as authorised in paragraph 11 to assist the government of Lebanon at its request; |
| Posted by: Captain America 2006-08-20 00:29 |
| #5 I forgot about the 17 mulligans thingy. More if the US doesn't get involved, I guess. Silly me! |
| Posted by: gorb 2006-08-20 00:28 |
| #4 Kofi is going to Lebanon on Monday, so I am sure he will ask his buddy Nasalboy to stop the Iranian-Syrian shipments..../..scarcism off |
| Posted by: Captain America 2006-08-20 00:28 |
| #3 Per 1701 language... "15. Decides further that all states shall take the necessary measures to prevent, by their nationals or from their territories or using their flag vessels or aircraft; a. the sale or supply to any entity or individual in Lebanon of arms and related materiel of all types, including weapons and ammunition, military vehicles and equipment, paramilitary equipment, and spare parts for the aforementioned, whether or not originating in their territories, and; b. the provision to any entity or individual in Lebanon of any technical training or assistance related to the provision, manufacture, maintenance or use of the items listed in subparagraph (a) above, except that these prohibitions shall not apply to arms, related material, training or assistance authorised by the government of Lebanon or by Unifil as authorised in paragraph 11; " Now, given this language, is it likely that the government of Lebanon authorizes the above? |
| Posted by: Captain America 2006-08-20 00:26 |
| #2 Considering there are only two UN resolutions (1559 and 1701) that make rearming Hezbos a violation, Kofi chooses to simply ignore. Don't know how many resolutions you have to have before Kofi would consider rearming the problem. Iraq violated 17 previous resolutions, so it looks like we have a ways to go yet. |
| Posted by: Captain America 2006-08-20 00:23 |
| #1 It seems logical that Hezb'Allah rearming itself would be a violation of 1701. Am I wrong? If this is so, why would it be a violation to go smack them? Seems pretty obvious, but this is the UN here, I guess. |
| Posted by: gorb 2006-08-20 00:08 |