Rocket fired from south Lebanon towards Israel
Source: Reuters
A rocket was fired from south Lebanon towards Israel on Sunday, Lebanese residents and security sources said, but it was not clear where the rocket landed and there were no immediate reports of damage inside Israel.
The rocket launch could be heard from the Lebanese town of Marjayoun, about 10 km (six miles) from the Israeli border. An Israeli military source said residents of a northern Israeli town reported hearing an explosion and Israeli police said forces were searching the area.
Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/26/us-lebanon-israel-rocket-idUSBRE94P0EY20130526?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&dlvrit=992637
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Swede Atlanta
(3,596 posts)The whole situation in the Middle East is a cluster. But if the Israelis are surprised when missiles are fired into Israel when they have attacked installations in Syria then Benjamin Netanyahu is stupid. Of course there will be push-back for the attacks on Syria, even if those attacks are warranted.
The Israeli populace needs to understand that every aggressive action (even if viewed as defensive) by Israel is likely to result in counter-attacks that go at the heart of the Iraseli state.
The whole situation is frustrating for all and deadly to those on the ground there.
Kurska
(5,739 posts)Swede Atlanta
(3,596 posts)I have every sympathy with the Israeli populace that wants to find a way to establish peace with their neighbors.
Unfortunately they, as we, are prevented from achieving common-sense goals by politicians and vested interests.
The only point I am making is when Israel launches attacks into Syria, however justified those attacks are, they should not be surprised when there is push-back that can, or likely will, result in damage or destruction of property and also loss of life.
facismrising
(16 posts)and are using sympathy left over from the holocaust to continue their campaign of Apartheid and Genocide against native Palestinians?
I thought most people on DU would be against colonization, especially colonization that takes it's direction from a religious work. Claiming a land, as the European immigrants and their children do, based on something from a religious work should not be allowed to happen today. The whole "chosen one" narrative is so racist and anti-semitic(Native Palestinians are in fact semitic) it should have no place among ideologies that the United States funds and supports.
Yet we do, and we tolerate the settlements and Religious rule in Israel. There are laws barring Israeli Jews from marrying Palestinians, their is apartheid guaranteeing that Jews will receive precedence over Palestians in all areas of the economy and government. It is just as bad as how the United States built it's wealth on the backs of African slaves. Sick and disgusting indeed!
jessie04
(1,528 posts)Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT and said: Racist Horseshit!
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT and said: "Using sympathy left over from the holocaust" ... this crosses the line. I agree with the alerter (and thank the alerter/ we don't need this garbage on DU)
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: I don't agree with the post, but it's not violating any rule that I'm aware of. It's a hot topic, but this post can be easily refuted instead of hidden.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)I'm here over 10 years and this is far from the worst that has been let stand (with moderators and juries).
jessie04
(1,528 posts)I could probably read the same blatant crap at stor- front.( I don't want to dignify it by spelling it).
It's the only post I have alerted on and I wish I could alert again it's so disgusting.
Yes I am saddened.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)You're bound to see far worse let stand on DU. There is a reason I don't recommend this board out to others and so few elected officials have anything at all to do with it (I can only think of Alan Grayson). This is one issue the far left has absolutely no credibility on.
hack89
(39,171 posts)Israel just needs a little patience - if they are lucky, it will be the Lebanese that will do it for them.
... not an adjective one often associates with Israel or Jews in general.
sodom
(42 posts)What planet are you on?
you are saying is delusional, because after looking and reading what is going on in Syria, the opposition is in trouble. All any person with military sense has to look at the map of Syria and see the opposition is strategically in trouble. I see the strategic importance of those latest battles militarily. That town where the opposition is fighting Government forces and Hezbullah is located near the border and the opposition is surrounded by them. They have no way of escaping. There is also a major confrontation in another key area near Aleppo, which is nearer to the Syrian Turkish border, which the opposition gets their main support. If they completely wipe out opposition support in the South and retake Aleppo, the opposition would be nearly decimated, with the exception of small areas controlled by the Kurds in the North. That is why the opposition has to hold on to that small area in the South near the Lebanese border. If the Assad forces take that, all of Southern Syria will be under his control and Hezbullah.
I've also read information, Assad has strong support, even among the Sunni population in Damascus because they don't want the extremists of the opposition to win because of atrocities committed by them. There is also a Christian group in Lebanon supporting Assad and has been in contact with his Government because of the threat from Israel. The rebellion is falling apart. The opposition is reporting Hezbullah's casualties, but they are not reporting their own, which is heavy. They need reinforcement if they are going to hold on to Southern Syria. They need supplies also because they are being heavily bombed.
another_liberal
(8,821 posts)Since we refused to give any support to Islamist rebels fighting in Syria, and we insist on the rebels we do support recognizing Israel's right to exist as a Jewish State, there is less and less chance Assad will actually be overthrown. Until about a month ago, the Islamist rebels' forces were doing especially well against government units, and the secular rebels were cooperating with them against their common enemy, Assad's army. Then we made it a condition that we (and our allies) would not aid any rebel forces in league with Islamist elements of the opposition.
We created the current division in the rebel forces (we along with the Israeli lobby on K street, that is). Since we insisted on the secular rebels breaking with Islamist and al Qaeda linked groups, Assad's troops have been retaking town after town. Our government needs to decide if they really want Assad gone or if they just want to play around with more ideologically pure dreams of nation-building in the Middle East.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)You're blaming Israel for the fact we want nothing to do with those who want to turn Syria into a sharia run country? Why on earth should be help religious fanatics who want turn back time on women and minorities?
another_liberal
(8,821 posts)Syria is not our country. It belongs to the Syrian people, not the American people. We do not get to tell them what their laws and customs should be. That is a lesson we should have learned long ago.
Are you aware that many predominately Muslim nations already employ versions of Sharia as the basis for their system of laws? Those countries include several important allies of the Untied States. Sharia is implemented differently by different Muslim cultures, there is not just one version, and not all are as strict or Medieval as the ancient texts command.
After all, we call ourselves a Christian nation, but we no longer burn witches, stone adulterers or take an eye for an eye as our Christian Bible commands, now do we?
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)and we should ignore them - especially if it means getting into bed with religious fanatics. Could you enlighten me with the names of countries that employ shariah law that don't crap all over women? Thanks.
BTW - most Americans are smart enough to know we are not a Christian country but do feel free to go back hundreds of years to try and make a silly comparison.
another_liberal
(8,821 posts)Don't call me silly. You're the one who's pretending to be an expert on Muslim religious law, my friend.
As to the main point you make: Let me remind you that there are many Syrians opposed to President Assad who don't want the United States involved (I posted a link to an article about some of them on General Discussion Forum just this morning) so don't assume our troops or even our weapons are universally desired. Of course no one at all who supports Assad wants our presence in Syria, and yes, they do get a vote too.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)our weapons are just fine with me as I think we should stay out of Syria completely. I'm still waiting for an answer on that beacon of a country that employs sharia law and doesn't shit all over women. I'll wait.
another_liberal
(8,821 posts)I'll try, if you will be kind enough to define what you mean by your scatological euphemism: ". . . shit all over women."
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)Do women have the same rights as men - can they vote, can they get educated, can they work outside the home, can they use birth control, can they pick their own husbands, can they divorce, can they live alone as single women, do they get stoned for adultery or holding hands or getting raped? For a progressive, this shouldn't be difficult thing to define.
another_liberal
(8,821 posts)Then that is what you should have said in the first place.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)anyone on this board but now I know better. So - where is that haven of sharia law (I suspect you're going to use deflection and diversion but let's see if you surprise me).
another_liberal
(8,821 posts)Every Muslim country in the World uses Sharia law as a starting point for it's legal code. That includes U.S. allies like Egypt, Pakistan, Bahrain, Kuwait, Yemen, Morocco, Turkey, Tunisia, Indonesia, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. They all allow women some of the rights you accuse them of not providing. Even the most conservative, Saudi Arabia, has recently allowed women the vote (something we only got around to doing in 1920). In fact, the only country to practice the kind of Shria law you are so afraid of was Afghanistan, when it was under Taliban control before 2001.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)as long as they don't drive to the polls (and I'm not aware of any election they have actually had - feel free to enlighten me), they just have to cover up from head to toe and have a male relative ok everything they do. What a freeking paradise for women!!! That we consider shitholes that treat women like crap allies in order to keep the oil flowing is a stain that will never wipe away. You do realize 1920 is almost 100 years ago, don't you? So all those countries don't have every single law I mentioned in every single country and that makes sharia peachy keen - if you're a woman, which would you rather live in? If you're a man, which one would you want your daughter to live in? Keep defending sharia - it tells me everything I need to know about you.
another_liberal
(8,821 posts)We have no right to try and force other cultures and other sovereign nations to adopt our customs and laws. We especially do not have a right to do so by the use of our overwhelming military force.
Let me ask you a question:
If Communist China's military were to become vastly superior to ours, would it be legal and justified for them to invade and occupy us on the grounds that so many of our young women are raped and abused every year, year-in-year-out? Would that be wrong of them, even though they claimed the reason was to protect the millions of American women whom our government is habitually unable to keep safe from rape and abuse?
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)If you go back to where we started chatting you'll see I want NOTHING to do with Syria. We can't figure out who the good guys are over there - the ones who want to overthrow al Assad AND want a secular democracy and not turn back the clock on women and minority rights so why you're asking me about force? That doesn't mean I can't call a shithole a shithole. I'm still allowed an opinion and can scream it from the rooftops if I see fit and I have no problem calling our flawed republic far superior to anything run by sharia law. I see what happens to women in sharia run countries and my stomach turns and the only thing I want to do is arm all the women - heavily.
another_liberal
(8,821 posts)I have one final cautionary note for you. If you get your wish and are able to "liberate" through armed violence all the Muslim women now living under various versions of Sharia law, don't be surprised if most of them respond by hating you for having done so (and having killed their fathers, brothers and sons in the process).
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)I said NOTHING about forcing anybody to do anything - and certainly nothing about losing American lives in the process. I merely said I was free to call a shithole a shithole and you're attributing things to me that I never said but I'm sure the women who are treated like crap their entire lives are thrilled you wont lower yourself to pronounce judgement on their precious sharia law.
another_liberal
(8,821 posts)Do you read what you post? Such as, ". . . the only thing I want to do is arm all the women - heavily."
Supplying weapons is exerting military power.
I am now going to leave this string. We've thoroughly covered the ground several times already. The last word will be yours, I'm sure.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)I just want them to have a fighting chance against the miserable men who make their lives unbearable. But it's very enlightening to know there are liberals who think it's okay to leave women to that fate without a thought.
hack89
(39,171 posts)awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)he will be replaced with someone crazier.
hack89
(39,171 posts)which is bad news for Hezbollah.
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)so little else matters.
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)The Syrian rebellion is an existential threat to them.
Meanwhile, Maliki sends 20,000 troops to chase Sunni rebels in Iraq's Syrian border provinces.
Some people thought toppling Assad was going to be a cakewalk. They were so wrong.
Harmony Blue
(3,978 posts)where the Kurds reside isn't exactly good news coming out of Iraq either.
jessie04
(1,528 posts)Do we really know that for certain or is that just empty talk?
it seems a little late that after 2 years he suddenly figured out that if Assad fell, then they were in serious trouble.
Franker65
(299 posts)As they have the defences to deal with them. Still, I guess Hizbollah better start preparing for some Israeli airstrikes.
jessie04
(1,528 posts)Hezbollah just fired rockets at Israel
" well, this is unfortunate but you know, Hezbollah is Hezbollah and what are you going to do."
Figure Israel is going to retaliate.
" oh my god, oh my god, oh the humanity, this is is the worst thing in the history of the world!!!!......woe is me. Israel is going to start World War 3....I mean 4....maybe 5. There will be innocent people killed and it will be Israel's fault. This is a catastrophe!!!! Its an act of war...they should go to the United Nations and file a complaint...not use weapons. It's a cluster fuck!! How could they do this!!!"
Not in reference to anyone in particular.. Just a little sarcasm.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)for anyone who has been here for a while. And not funny at all.
Zoeisright
(8,339 posts)jessie04
(1,528 posts)I assume you agree with what it says.
Whats more to say ?
