| Submit your comments on this article |
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
| West, UN demand 'immediate' release of Israelis |
| 2006-07-13 |
| Wednesday's capture of two Israeli soldiers by Hizbullah and the subsequent explosion of violence triggered a wave of reactions from around the world. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert described the abductions as an "act of war" and warned that his country's retaliation would be "very painful." UN Secretary General Kofi Annan called for the release of the two Israeli soldiers, but he also "unreservedly" condemned the Israeli incursion into Lebanese territory that followed. Annan also urged both sides to protect civilians, adding that "the maiming of unarmed civilians is terrorism pure and simple, whatever the cause." Speaking to reporters following a meeting with Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, Annan's personal representative for South Lebanon, Geir Pedersen said that "Hizbullah's action escalates the already tense situation ... and is an act of very dangerous proportions; this is not in Lebanon's interest. It highlights again the need for decisions relating to peace and war to be taken by the government and for it to exercise its monopoly on the use of force from its territory." |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #4 well said, Jules |
| Posted by: 2b 2006-07-13 09:08 |
| #3 "the maiming of unarmed civilians is terrorism pure and simple, whatever the cause." This, from the poster boy of the International Community, which has its heart set on confiscating defensive arms from any and all persons, as this week's reports have exposed. What a plan for chaos from the Masters of the International Community: * Remove a citizen's right to bear arms for defense, of country or self, leaving citizens entirely reliant on the good will of their fellow man-and when that fails, reliant on the international agencies like the UN for "protection" in a full-blown war. Ask a few hundred thousand folks in Africa how well the UN has protected them from savagery. This is a recipe for a lot more dead civilians. Let us not abandon our country's principles. * Declare that any attack on unarmed civilians is terrorism, thus fuzzing the difference between "insurgents and freedom fighters" who intentionally blow up babies and tourists so they can establish a sharia-based, world-wide caliphate versus the military of an attacked country responding to the attacks, killing known terrorists and incidentally knocking off bystanders and family, who in some cases are innocent, but in some cases are sheltering and protecting monsters in their midst. Mr. Annan thinks he will stop wars with this approach, but instead, our embrace of such a weakness encourages increased savagery on the part of our enemies. Don't believe it? Watch the predatory behavior of animals. The shortsightedness of this worldview is stupifying. Mr. Annan is hawking a new plan-if the International Community says that any attack on civilians is terrorism, the shame of it all will decrease attacks on civilians. Does he have even the most minute understanding of human nature? If humans are attacked, apparently they are not supposed defend themselves, their families or their country-they are instead supposed pray to the Sepulchre of the UN so that they may live to tell the tale. I don't put my trust in the impulses of such leaders in the International Community. They cannot judge when use of force is necessary and good and when it is wrong. For them it is ALWAYS wrong. |
| Posted by: Jules 2006-07-13 08:41 |
| #2 On french teevee there was a clip of kofi speaking at the un, and he said it amounted to "state terrorism"... btw, french teevees are in full eurabian mode IMHO, implicitely blaming Israel as the aggressor, alluding situation was out of controil for Isreal which is under attack on two fronts, giving most of airtime to hizbollah mouthpieces, insisting on lebanese civilian casualties (but glancing on the fact 3 isrealis civilians have been killed in shellings), etc, etc... yesterday, most of the afternoon newsflashes of lci (supposedly a "conservative" channel, by french standards) put the emphasis on the bridge destroyed by the IAF... and yesterday evening a special edition was entirely dedicaced to... you bet it, zinedine zidane's press conference about the WC headbutt... I cringe when I watch that crap. |
| Posted by: anonymous5089 2006-07-13 05:38 |
| #1 Annan also urged both sides to protect civilians, adding that "the maiming of unarmed civilians is terrorism pure and simple, whatever the cause." Kofi is a useless arse. Civilians are sometimes hurt or killed in war, and that does not make the military terrorists. Without doubt, French civilians were killed on D-Day yet Ike was no terrorist. Civilians died at Vicksburg, yet Grant is not Osama. You would have to actively ignore the entire history of human conflict not to get the difference. If terrorism is to have any meaning, it is the intentional targeting of non-combatants. That seems a basic notion for such a great statesman to miss. Yet, the larger imperative is always to condemn Israel, or the West generally but mostly Israel, no matter how intellectually vapid one must make oneself appear. The appeal is to prejudice, not reason. It's not like the UN is accountable to anybody anyway. The UN will remain useless and irrelevent until Kofi Annan is gone. And even then the odds are against it. |
| Posted by: Baba Tutu 2006-07-13 01:09 |