What do they (Islamic terrorists) want?

[pro_universal]

Rodrigo Bivar:

Why don’t you read what I wrote instead of defending your misinterpretation?

Did I write that the Israelis DID NOT push for the return of the kidnapped soldiers? No. I said they did not push with ANY VIGOR. Both you and Valke2 have misinterpreted what I wrote.

Again, what on earth is “vigor” if not a full scale war? What do you think what war was on for? Fun?

The causus belli was the kidnapping - that was the straw that broke the camel’s back. But it is apparent to a rational observer (i.e. me) that the Israelis did not pursue their return with any vigor. They sent some forces to retrieve them in the short term but not very many - in the scheme of things. In the entire war the direct action to retrieve the soldiers were small by comparison.

Okay, so what was the purpose of the full scale invasion of south Lebanon and the bombing campaign?

Furthermore, I’d rather go with the UN estimate than some Asian reporters who are biased against the Jews.

Yeah, they’re not asian reporters, but anyway…where are those UN figures? Want to cite the UN document that has the info?

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Hasn’t it occurred to you that the Israelis spent much, much, much more effort in bombing the Hezbollah rocket launchers, military command control sites and Lebanese infrastructure than actual military means to retrieve the kidnapped soldiers? That is what I meant by lack of vigor in retrieving the soldiers.

You think they would just let those soldiers be kidnapped without reaction? Of course they sent a small limited military force to see if they can retrieve them. That is only natural. However, in the context of the entire war, one can see these facts:

1. They refused to negotiate.
2. They sent a limited force.
3. They spent most of the energies trying to kill Hezbollah and destroy the Lebanese sites harboring Hezbollah.

As for your Asian reporters - I can only say I prefer to believe the UN. But be that as it may, you have reporters, I also have reporters.

camera.org/index.asp?x_context=2&x_outlet=2&x_article=1195

September 7, 2006
Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America

Regardless, the accumulated evidence from various sources exposes as a deception Hezbollah’s claims to have lost 68 or 74 fighters.

Israel’s claim to have killed 500-600 Hezbollah fighters, meanwhile, is buttressed by the government’s partial list of names of Hezbollah fighters who died through Aug. 6, and is corroborated in some media reports.

 

[pro_universal]

Hasn’t it occurred to you that the Israelis spent much, much, much more effort in bombing the Hezbollah rocket launchers, military command control sites and Lebanese infrastructure than actual military means to retrieve the kidnapped soldiers? That is what I meant by lack of vigor in retrieving the soldiers.

Well what do you think they were bombing lebanon for? What do you think they hoped to achieve? Surely not victory over Hizbullah…if that was the main goal, then Israel failed even more miserably than if its main goal were to get back the soldiers. At least there’s a chance of that. Hizbullah is now on its way to ruling all of Lebanon, and is undaunted by the attack…they even killed an Israeli special forces commander after the war was over.

You think they would just let those soldiers be kidnapped without reaction? Of course they sent a small limited military force to see if they can retrieve them. That is only natural. However, in the context of the entire war, one can see these facts:

1. They refused to negotiate.
2. They sent a limited force.
3. They spent most of the energies trying to kill Hezbollah and destroy the Lebanese sites harboring Hezbollah.

1. Israel is negotiating right now.
2. Israel sent whole divisions into Lebanon (they were defeated in ground combat on several occasions_
3. They didn’t kill many Hizbullah and made Lebanese more supportive of them. (Hizbullah numbers as recorded by a definite count of funerals, and support being noted even in the Jerusalem post.)

As for your Asian reporters - I can only say I prefer to believe the UN. But be that as it may, you have reporters, I also have reporters.

Well, the Asia times report counted Hizbullah funerals. So you know how they got the number.

The daily telegraph isn’t the UN. Where’s the UN estimate?

An organization founded by some Israelis to “combat media bias against Israel” isn’t the UN either.

Where are the UN figures?

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Did those divisions pursue the kidnapped soldiers? I don’t think so.

You think some isolated Hezbollah minor victories count for much? No. The IDF did lose 119 soldiers - they didn’t kill themselves.

As for the UN estimate -

telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/08/22/wmid122.xml

A UN official estimated the deaths at 500, 10 per cent of the force Hizbollah is thought to muster, not all of whom are front-line fighters.

 

[pro_universal]

Did those divisions pursue the kidnapped soldiers? I don’t think so.

You think some isolated Hezbollah minor victories count for much? No. The IDF did lose 119 soldiers - they didn’t kill themselves.

As for the UN estimate -

telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/08/22/wmid122.xml

A UN official estimated the deaths at 500, 10 per cent of the force Hizbollah is thought to muster, not all of whom are front-line fighters.

That’s not a UN estimate. That’s one line in an article that is the same one cited by “CAMERA” in the above links.

Where’s the UN estimate? An official office who made this estimate? A name, even, and a method for the estimate? Even then, the estimate was made on August 22nd or earlier…shortly after the war. So where’s the documentation for it?

The Asia times reporters counted funerals up to October 13th.

You have a serious problem judging credibility Rodrigo. I think this might be the cause of your bizarre views on some of these issues.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Here is an Arab newspaper to counter your Arab reporters:

kuwaittimes.net/navariednews.asp?dismode=article&artid=1677308013

When questioned about the July 12 kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers, Hezbollah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah told Lebanese news station NTV on Aug. 27, “We did not think, even 1 percent, that the capture would lead to a confrontation at this time and of this magnitude. You ask me, if I had known on July 11 … that the operation would lead to such a war, would I do it? I say no, absolutely not.”
Hezbollah’s first rocket attack on Haifa, not the kidnapping, compelled Israel to engage in an invasion for which it was not necessarily prepared. Nasrallah knew when he pushed hostilities to that point that Hezbollah was provoking Israel into a full-scale war, and he had his forces ready and entrenched to resist the onslaught.

…

Sources in Lebanon claim Hezbollah has buried more than 700 fighters so far, with many more to go. Hezbollah needs the ceasefire period to physically recover from its losses and recover public support. Meanwhile, the Shiite nexus of Iran, Hezbollah and the Syrian regime is using the cease-fire period as a window of opportunity to solidify the perception of Hezbollah’s victory while Israel remains entangled in domestic politics.

 

[pro_universal]

Here is an Arab newspaper to counter your Arab reporters:

kuwaittimes.net/navariednews.asp?dismode=article&artid=1677308013

When questioned about the July 12 kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers, Hezbollah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah told Lebanese news station NTV on Aug. 27, “We did not think, even 1 percent, that the capture would lead to a confrontation at this time and of this magnitude. You ask me, if I had known on July 11 … that the operation would lead to such a war, would I do it? I say no, absolutely not.”
Hezbollah’s first rocket attack on Haifa, not the kidnapping, compelled Israel to engage in an invasion for which it was not necessarily prepared. Nasrallah knew when he pushed hostilities to that point that Hezbollah was provoking Israel into a full-scale war, and he had his forces ready and entrenched to resist the onslaught.

…

Sources in Lebanon claim Hezbollah has buried more than 700 fighters so far, with many more to go. Hezbollah needs the ceasefire period to physically recover from its losses and recover public support. Meanwhile, the Shiite nexus of Iran, Hezbollah and the Syrian regime is using the cease-fire period as a window of opportunity to solidify the perception of Hezbollah’s victory while Israel remains entangled in domestic politics.

You’re just listing articles that were cited in the CAMERA directory.

This one is perhaps even worse than the telegraph article. There’s not even an anonymous UN official cited, or even an author for the article. It’s a poorly written opinion piece that as far as we know, pulled every bit of information in it out of thin air.

What happened to you? I thought you were one who liked to cite primary sources and “prove” your points with facts? All of a sudden, anonymous figures and vague articles from Arab papers are proof to you?

Strange…very strange

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

That’s not a UN estimate. That’s one line in an article that is the same one cited by “CAMERA” in the above links.

Where’s the UN estimate? An official office who made this estimate? A name, even, and a method for the estimate? Even then, the estimate was made on August 22nd or earlier…shortly after the war. So where’s the documentation for it?

The Asia times reporters counted funerals up to October 13th.

You have a serious problem judging credibility Rodrigo. I think this might be the cause of your bizarre views on some of these issues.

Back to your sliming habit again, pro? All you can do is attack my credibility because you cannot attack my facts.

So what if it is a UN official who said this? Is he/she more credible than your arab reporters? Of course.

Is CAMERA more credible than your Arab source? Of course.

 

[pro_universal]

Back to your sliming habit again, pro? All you can do is attack my credibility because you cannot attack my facts.

Again, this is a strange accusation coming from the person who accuses every source that disagrees with him of being “asians biased against Jews” or “secret Muslims”

So what if it is a UN official who said this? Is he/she more credible than your arab reporters? Of course.

Now they’re arabs? Huh? Alistair Crooke is an Arab name? Who is the UN official? Where did the UN official get this number?

Is CAMERA more credible than your Arab source? Of course.

Considering that CAMERA does no on the ground reporting and just cuts from webpages, it’s not terribly credible. But anyway…you cited an Arab source, not me, remember?

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

So what if I cite articles that CAMERA also cites? Is there a rule against that? I just wanted you to know that an Arab newspaper reports far greater Hezbollah casualties than you wish.

Why should CAMERA have ground journalists? It’s a committee for accuracy in Middle East reporting in America, for crying out loud.

Founded in 1982, the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America is a media-monitoring, research and membership organization devoted to promoting accurate and balanced coverage of Israel and the Middle East. CAMERA fosters rigorous reporting, while educating news consumers about Middle East issues and the role of the media. Because public opinion ultimately shapes public policy, distorted news coverage that misleads the public can be detrimental to sound policymaking. A non-partisan organization, CAMERA takes no position with regard to American or Israeli political issues or with regard to ultimate solutions to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Who made you God so you can make up the rules, pro?

PS: Why should that UN official be named? Is that a rule you made up too?

 

[pro_universal]

Rodrigo Bivar:

So what if I cite articles that CAMERA also cites? Is there a rule against that?

I’m pointing out that you’re not adding anything new. You’re just repeating what was already posted as if it’s further proof.

I just wanted you to know that an Arab newspaper reports far greater Hezbollah casualties than you wish.

But you just said Arab newspapers aren’t credible. Why would you post one?

A non-partisan organization, CAMERA takes no position with regard to American or Israeli political issues or with regard to ultimate solutions to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Guess what else CAMERA isn’t? It’s not the UN source for your figures.

PS: Why should that UN official be named? Is that a rule you made up too?

Well, it’s hard to assess credibility or even to find a method for the estimate without having some info as to how it was made, isn’t it?

 

[YinYangMom]

www.foxnews.com

The lead article is on the goals of the Islamic terrorists. They are very simple:

1. Seizing Jerusalem and subjugation of Christendom.
2. Destruction of the White House and by extension the USA.

Back to the original topic of this thread…goals of the Islamic terrorists…

I just received this link to a documentary called “Obsession: Radical Islam’s War against the West” which has brought this entire question about what Islamic terrorists’ goals into a new light…at least for me.

I honestly don’t know what to make of it…is the documentary propaganda? If so, for what purpose?

Or is it on the mark? And if so, what does that really mean?

Have we spent the past 6 years focusing on the wrong target?
There seems to be no war on terror as much as there has been a war waged on the west by extremists. If we don’t focus on the right source of this war how can we expect to win?

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

I never said Arab reporters aren’t credible per se. I’m pointing out your particular Arab reporters aren’t credible because of the following:

1. An UN official puts the estimate at 500.
2. Camera, a non-partisan media analysis organization, using on-the-ground reports counting Hezbollah fighter funerals, estimates the number to be around 500+.
3. An Arab newspaper backs up the UN official’s estimate.

You have nothing really to say, have you? First you don’t read and understand what I wrote. Then make up your own rules. Who died and made you god, pro?

 

[cestusdei]

Yin, Absolutely correct. We can all pretend that it isn’t a religious war, but it is. Muslims agree with the stated goals of the terrorists. Even Muslims who claim they are against the terrorists still find their goals admirable.

 

[cestusdei]

Rod, notice once again how pro likes to debate incidentals rather then deal with the facts. Once you prove your point he will ignore it and move on. He will do the same on the next thread about the next atrocity. Anything to avoid actually confronting, much less condemning, Islamic terrorists like Hezbullah.

 

[pro_universal]

I never said Arab reporters aren’t credible per se. I’m pointing out your particular Arab reporters aren’t credible because of the following:

Okay, what arab reporters? Who did I cite that was an Arab or working for an Arab paper? I cited two sources: English reporters and the Israeli press.

1. An UN official puts the estimate at 500.

But you don’t know who he was, how he got his number, or even if he said it. US officials declared “The insurgency is in its last throes” two years ago in Iraq. That doesn’t make it a good estimate.

1. Camera, a non-partisan media analysis organization, using on-the-ground reports counting Hezbollah fighter funerals, estimates the number to be around 500+.

CAMERA is not non-partisan. It is a pro-Israeli organization founded by Israelis. It also didn’t report anything, it just copied the same unsourced report that claimed a UN official made this estimate in August.

1. An Arab newspaper backs up the UN official’s estimate.

An arab newspaper that isn’t credible doesn’t back up anything. Of course you know that.

You have nothing really to say, have you? First you don’t read and understand what I wrote. Then make up your own rules. Who died and made you god, pro?

No, I do have something to say:

I cited a report that counted funerals in Lebanon to arrive at a hard figure for Hizbullah deaths. You know who the reporters are, you know how they got the number.

You cited a Telegraph piece that cites a “UN official’s estimate” from August, and it gives no hard number, no methodology, and no reason to believe the UN official was even in Lebanon or relying on Lebanese reports.

I don’t see why this is so hard for you to understand. Your information lacks credibility. If I presented the same level of authority to support a claim that Islam is very good, you would reject it all out of hand. Yet now you’re asking us to believe you on this issue…why?

Oh that’s right. Because whateve confirms Rodrigo’s preconceptions is true, and whatever disconfirms it is false.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Your double-standards are showing again, pro.

According to pro:
Arab news reporters = unbiased and truthful.
Jewish news organisation = biased and untruthful.
UN official = biased and untruthful.
International news papers = biased and untruthful.

So who died and made you god, pro?

 

[pro_universal]

Your double-standards are showing again, pro.

According to pro:
Arab news reporters = unbiased and truthful.
Jewish news organisation = biased and untruthful.
UN official = biased and untruthful.
International news papers = biased and untruthful.

So who died and made you god, pro?

Okay Rodrigo, let’s go through this one more time:

1. Arab reporters: Where did I cite one? Who did I say was credible? You are the only person on this thread citing an Arab paper and claiming that it’s credible.
2. Jewish news: I cited one to support my claims. You didn’t cite a news organization, but rather an advocacy group that uses bits of other people’s articles.
3. UN official: Where is the UN official? Or are you really incapable of seeing the difference between an anonymous quote in the telegraph and a UN official’s statement?
4. International Newspapers: Yeah, I cited one with hard numbers. Where are yours?

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Rod, notice once again how pro likes to debate incidentals rather then deal with the facts. Once you prove your point he will ignore it and move on. He will do the same on the next thread about the next atrocity. Anything to avoid actually confronting, much less condemning, Islamic terrorists like Hezbullah.

I really sick of pro’s personal attacks. I just wish he would just discuss the issues without sliming anyone. But then again, I’m sure some people here find him entertaining.

 

[HailMary]

What do they (Islamic terrorists) want?

They have their own agenda - to convert the world, just like Catholic Church.

But I think that terrorism is a result of abortion/contraception. How can we expect peace out there if there is not peace in the womb ?

It just follows the pattern of God chastising His people when they go astray.