More self-defense:
BEIRUT, July 30 — Israeli warplanes seeking to destroy Hezbollah rocket launchers blasted a group of houses in a southern Lebanese village Sunday, killing more than 50 people, most of them women and children, according to Lebanese officials and on-scene interviews by Lebanese television reporters.
Coming at a particularly sensitive point in negotiations to end the conflict, the attack on the village seemed to throw the painstaking process of building toward an agreement into turmoil. Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora said he would not hold talks with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice until a ceasefire is called.
“There is no place on this sad morning for any discussion other than an immediate and unconditional ceasefire as well as an international investigation into the Israeli massacres in Lebanon now,” Siniora told a news conference in Beirut.
Rice returns to Middle East for more talks
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s shuttle diplomacy brought her to the Middle East on Saturday f
Check out this story and photos, which show Hezbollah fighters in civilian clothing, in a civilian area. These guys bivouac in homes, something prohited in our Constitution and the Geneva Convention. I guess as long as they are aiming at killing Jooos it’s all okay?
TP,
The Hezbollah, in this case, are freedom fighters, defending their homeland.
Please let me know, where, in the US Constitution and GC (that quaint document) that bivouac’ing is “prohibited”.
If Mexico attacked us, would it be illegal to wear civilian clothes in a civilian area or “bivouac” in homes? Pray tell, what planet do you reside on because it certainly is not Earth!
In fact, bivouac comes from Swiss German denoting a civilians’ patrol supporting the ordinary town watch. (Did you get the word, civilian?)
“Killing Jooos”? Not hardly. Some are, wait for it, actually, Christians!
Simply defending their own turf.
The Hezbollah, in this case, are freedom fighters, defending their homeland.(???)
Hizbolá is a terrorist groups U.N. says.
See lou later
Amendment [III.]
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
The reference tot he 3rd Amendment was my feeble attempt at humor/sarcasm due to the SCOTUS ruling on Hamda v Rumsfeld. If we’re gonna give ‘em due process, why not the rest?
The Geneva Convention prohibits military forces from engaging in warfare san uniforms, and any caught are subject to execution on the spot.
This is the crux of the Hezbos War Crime accusation I am Making:
Art 50 Section 7
7. The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favour or impede military operations. The Parties to the conflict shall not direct the movement of the civilian population or individual civilians in order to attempt to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield military operations.
If Mexico attacked us, the fight would be in Mexico (unless they borrowed a nuclear-tipped missile for an EMP attack), and the military (at least ours) has plenty of shelters and plenty of people to put them up.
As to the Swiss reference, it is an archaic definition, and my choice of words was bad.
The fact remains that the Hezbos are the bad guys who started this latest series of events by kidnapping IDF soldiers. And the Hezbos wouldn’t even have been there if Lebanon and the un-United Nations had followed through with UN Resolution 1559, pertinent text below:
“1. Reaffirms its call for the strict respect of the sovereignty, territorial integrity, unity, and political independence of Lebanon under the sole and exclusive authority of the Government of Lebanon throughout Lebanon;
“2. Calls upon all remaining foreign forces to withdraw from Lebanon;
“3. Calls for the disbanding and disarmament of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias;
The following is the Geneva Convention definition of a civilian:
civilian
A civilian is any person who does not belong to any of the following categories: members of the armed forces, militias or volunteer corps, organized resistance movements, and residents of an occupied territory who spontaneously take up arms. If there is any doubt whether a person is civilian, then he or she is to be considered a civilian. (Protocol I, Art. 50, Sec. 1)
My apologies to Susie for using up your bandwidth in your house, avanti, you may feel free to accost me at my place, or we may shoot at each other from our houses (with links to each other, etc) if you prefer.
Upon review of your site, perhaps the best alternative would be to set up a Spy vs Spy blogspot site with both us sharing Admin priviledges to play with the side bar, and separate logins to contribute posts.
I already have one for local and state politics, if you wish to see what I mean.
My apologies, avanti. Sky-Ho, the offer stands.