Wording that descibe hezbollah fighters?

Originally posted by princeofpeace
LOL that could work. Timothy McVeigh was a militant. So in essence Hezbo is just a whole bunch of Timoth McVeighs just with towels and camels. Hmmm. Good description.

Timothy McVeigh was a terrorist when he commited a terrorist act.

Hezbollah is an army becaue they do represent people, they are a political army, and they are therefor soldiers, as anyone with a gun and a little bit of traing is.

Hezbollah is also a terrorist organization because of their tactics during peace time, they use terror to further their own agenda.

Hezbollah is a militant force NOT a terrorist force when at war, because any death associated with Hezbollah while at war is an act of war, not terror. Otherwise a rocket into Israel is a tiny terrorist act when compared with IDF bombing an entire country back 30 years.

They are also a humanitarian aid supplier since they aid those caught in the ruble and have medical outpost for victims.

They are also education supporters, they have their own schools and hostpitals.

Words change given the situation. All in all they are men.. they have guns.. they are soldiers. Militants. What ever, no diferent then Israel who are men with guns.

You have voted Rockpuck for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.

Have a WATS. That was probably the most on the nail description of Hezbollah I've seen for a while, better than the constant "Them bad, we good" taht is bandied around.

Yes, Hezbollah do bad. So do Israel. Both are far from innocent in this mess but it is unfair to lable anyone a victim/aggressor when the real victims are the poor sods caught in the middle. Just when they thought things were going well for their country too.

So the fact that Hezbo gives money to schools and the communities etc and the fact that have launched so many terrorist acts in this conflict allows them to transcend the terrorist label? So if Al Queda is political then they are not terrorist? Im starting to figure this out.

By the way...Tim McVeigh represented a lot of people as well. They just werent present when he committed his act and when he went down for it. Plenty of folks agreed with him though. But then again, thats the terrorist way no?

[edit on 7-8-2006 by princeofpeace]

Originally posted by stumason

You have voted Rockpuck for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.

Have a WATS. That was probably the most on the nail description of Hezbollah I've seen for a while, better than the constant "Them bad, we good" taht is bandied around.

Yes, Hezbollah do bad. So do Israel. Both are far from innocent in this mess but it is unfair to lable anyone a victim/aggressor when the real victims are the poor sods caught in the middle. Just when they thought things were going well for their country too.

Thanks, Towel heads and other dirogatory comments don't further inteligent conersation, and I see what you and Subz where talking about, and where it comes from.

One person attacking and targeting civilians = terrorist. A group fo people targeting and attacking civilians = an army?

Okay yeah right...love your logic. Thanks for playing.

Originally posted by princeofpeace
So the fact that Hezbo gives money to schools and the communities etc and the fact that have launched so many terrorist acts in this conflict allows them to transcend the terrorist label? So if Al Queda is political then they are not terrorist? Im starting to figure this out.

By the way...Tim McVeigh represented a lot of people as well. They just werent present when he committed his act and when he went down for it. Plenty of folks agreed with him though. But then again, thats the terrorist way no?

[edit on 7-8-2006 by princeofpeace]

He was a militant until he commited a terrorist act, he was therefore a terroist because of what he did.

In war you cannot commit a terrorist act, only acts of war, other wise say Israel killes 50 people in an apartment buolding as an act of war, a rocket kills a little old lady in Israel and that is a terrorist act. Both are armies, both are at war with eachother it is unfair to classify them any different.

Originally posted by princeofpeace
So the fact that Hezbo gives money to schools and the communities etc and the fact that have launched so many terrorist acts in this conflict allows them to transcend the terrorist label? So if Al Queda is political then they are not terrorist? Im starting to figure this out.

What, pray tell, are these "so many Terrorist attacks". They only ever fire rockets in response to Israeli actions. They don't do suicide bombings, they don't blow up trains or planes.

To me, a terrorist is someone who secretly plants/carries bombs in a deliberate, cinical attempt to kill innocents. Firing rockets in a time of war, even if at population centres, isn't terrorist.

I have not seen any examples provided that Hezbollah ever sneak/carry bombs in an attempt at killing civilians.

Al Qaeda is just an enabling network, it isn't a terrorist group. It's a bunch of rich Arabs that give other Muslims money and help them make contacts with bomb makers etc. If you notice, many attacks are attributed to AQ affiliated groups.

Rarely, if ever, does AQ actually carry out an attack itself. I doubt they even had direct control over 9/11, to be honest.

You look at things in a far to simplistic sense. Nothing is ever black and white. You may find you will learn alot more if you step back and see the multitude of different shades there are.

So how many Al Queda would it have taken on 9/11 for it NOT to be considered a terrorist attack if its a numbers thing to you? Just curious.

Originally posted by princeofpeace
One person attacking and targeting civilians = terrorist. A group fo people targeting and attacking civilians = an army?

Okay yeah right...love your logic. Thanks for playing.

If that one person belonged to a collective group of people who where at WAR open WAR with the people they attack he is not a terrorist.

If he acts on his own feelings and walks out of his house, launches a rocket and tries to claim he did nothing wrong, he is a terrorist. A group of people is an army if backed by a population, if not a militant group and if both sides exchange fire then no, logically that is not a terrorist act.

So...was 9/11 a terror attack then? I want to use your criteria.

Originally posted by princeofpeace
So how many Al Queda would it have taken on 9/11 for it NOT to be considered a terrorist attack if its a numbers thing to you? Just curious.

You dont get it, do you? In a really, really, simplistic sense, AQ are a terrorist group. But, if you want to understand above toddler level, you have to see that AQ (translated, The Base) themselves just enable other groups/cells to be terrorist's.

It's not about numbers, it about the manner and style of the attack. Flying airliners into some buildings on a unsuspecting public is a terrorist act. Launching rockets at your enemy in a time of war, reagrdless if it's at civilians or military, is not terrorist. It might be abhorrent and cruel, but it is war.

If Israel can blow up Apartment blocks they claim are Hezbollah, the Hezbollah can target the industrial city of Haifa (economic target?) or Israeli civilians who are nearly all either serving, reserve or ex-military. It's War (so I keep getting told)

Originally posted by princeofpeace
So...was 9/11 a terror attack then? I want to use your criteria.

Terrorist..see above.

If, say, the US was at war with Saudi, then it could be seen as an act of War. A war crime, but an act of war none the less.

It was also not done on behalf of a nation but an ideology, which is another facet one must consider.

But Al Queda as we have found out has many members and is backed by some governments. So now they arent terrorists?

Originally posted by princeofpeace
But Al Queda as we have found out has many members and is backed by some governments. So now they arent terrorists?

"We"?

>Groan

Weak bro, weak........

Originally posted by princeofpeace
Weak bro, weak........

Care to elaborate?

EDIT: I have a feeling that you believe I dont think AQ are terrorists. If thats the case, you obviously dont understand what I'm saying. They are, but they are not the ones carrying out the attacks, they fund and support the groups that do it. AQ are not some huge terrorist army around the world, whatever Bush & Co would have you believe. They are a network, an enabler.

If your a muslim extremist, you go to these guys to meet others who can help build bombs, or train to fire weapons.

There are no legions of AQ troops out there, they just enable others to get the skills, materials and money to carry out their attacks in their corner of the world.

[edit on 7/8/06 by stumason]

I would agree Stumason that Al Qaeda is more of a proxy for other nations, kind of like a name that a country attaches to their own militants to blame it on a separate group. Saudi Arabia and Iran where the main contractors of 9/11, they used Al Qaeda expertise and ability to infiltrate and stay low for long periods of time (sleeper cells)

Saudi Arabia and Iran profit more then anyone from the attacks because of oil prices soaring, along with Iraq being removed from the picture Iran is now the military might of Arab states. Is Al Qaeda a terrorist organization? Yes, they secretly planned and killed 3,000 some people for another country under the Vail of Radical Islamic Jihad, which people like Osama know is false, they know no one is getting 72 virgins.

Thanks for the invite stu,

And as much as it pains me.....I have to agree that it is far more complicated than a definition.

A Terrorist would/could be defined as anyone that performs any act that causes terror. Under that definition, a Marine Sniper (me) would be classified as a Terrorist.

Yet I was there right after the bombing in 1983 and there was definitely terror involved.

Semper

Originally posted by semperfortis
Thanks for the invite stu,

And as much as it pains me...

..I have to agree that it is far more complicated than a definition.

A Terrorist would/could be defined as anyone that performs any act that causes terror. Under that definition, a Marine Sniper (me) would be classified as a Terrorist.

Yet I was there right after the bombing in 1983 and there was definitely terror involved.

Semper

Exunctly. As the saying goes, "One mans Terrorist..blah blah.."

It's an ambiguos label in itself designed to terrorise the populace and coerce the way they think about a group. How many times have we heard Greenpeace described as terrorists, but when compared to the likes of Hamas or AQ, they are not.

EDIT: For the record, I do not dispute that the Marine Barracks attack was a horrible attack. Carried out by terrorists opposed to the US presence there, however, as discussed in the other thread, there is evidence that islamic Jihad carried out the attack, not Hezbollah. However, elements (i stress this point) did assimilate into the later founded hezbollah. That does not necessarily mean Hezbollah carried out the attack, though.

[edit on 13/8/06 by stumason]

Originally posted by makeitso

When the PLO was kicked out of Lebanon in 1982, Mugniyah joined the ranks of Hezbollah and rose quickly. Russia contends that at some point in the 1980’s, he served as one of Yassir Arafat’s body guards. What is noteworthy is that Mugniyah first joined the Sunni PLO faction and only later joined the Islamist Shi’ite Hezbollah.

PLO is not sunni and has no link to sunni militant groups that becuase PLO are a sucular nationalist group and thats why there was so much friction between them and Hamas(Sunni)

They where completly against any form of Islamic militant groups.