Wednesday, August 23, 2006

Amnesty International

From a roughly quoted article on USA Today:
Amnesty International on Wednesday accused Israel of war crimes, saying it broke international law by deliberately destroying Lebanon's civilian infrastructure during its recent war with Hezbollah guerrillas.

It said initial evidence indicates that such destruction was deliberate and part of a military strategy, rather than 'collateral damage.'

AI's claims that Israel "violated international laws banning direct attacks on civilians and barring indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks". "There is clear evidence of disproportionate and indiscriminate attacks."

AI said it would review Hezbollah's attacks on Israel separately.
Yet another example of AI's precocious use of biased reporting and ignorance to rail against Israel. Why is Israel targeted first? And why is Hezbollah only refered to with a note for further review?

Whatever. It's funny that these AI people do not seem to understand the very basics of terrorism and/or warfare. Hezbollah is a terrorist group that uses the Lebanese civilian population as human shields and deliberately sets up it's HQ's in areas with hospitals, schools and highly populated sectors. Not to mention setting up an HQ on the UN peace forces front doors to ensure that any, ever so slightly missed, missile attack on them will produce UN forces casualities! There is clear evidence that they even plant bodies in striken areas to make the body count look worse than it really is.

How can you trust such a diabolical group in anything they claim? You can't. Get rid of Hezbollah by whatever means is quickest and least severe on the surrounding peoples. Just as cited in my other article about the letter from a Lebanese American.

Infrastructures: Anyone who knows anything about warfare knows that to reduce an enemies strength quickly and effeciently strikes must be made upon the infrastructure used by that enemy. This is to ensure that the enemy cannot get supplies, cannot move quickly if at all and thus can be cornered and taken out more easily. Sad but true as usual in war.

All but the Shiite-Hezbollah supporting Lebanese population wants to see Hezbollah destroyed once and for all. They have murdrered thousands of Lebanese christians and thousands of their own people besides the above mentioned "human shield" techniques.

One must wonder what hidden agenda AI (or any other group or media) has up it's sleeve to be constantly pointing fingers in the wrong directions and failing to see anything but short term and shallow gaols based on somewhat erroneous views of human rights.

It is often the weakness of our modern world to behold the great and sublime, the dreadful and horrifying; and only see in it yet another news scoop or chance to blow some political trumpet.

War is hell. What do they think? Killing can be made more pleasant? Destruction more tasteful?

And what is this codswallop about disproportionate attacks? That's the way to do it if you wish to win quick and decisive victory in any war! You'd think they had used an A-bomb or something.

General Douglas MacArthur stated this himself and would have condemned any other way as a means of perpetuating the fighting indefintely.

Some quotes from Gen. MacArthur:
In war there is no substitute for victory...

But once war is forced upon us, there is no other alternative than to apply every available means to bring it to a swift end. War's very object is victory, not prolonged indecision...

It is fatal to enter any war without the will to win it...

We have had our last chance. If we do not devise some greater and more equitable system, Armageddon will be at our door...

The problem basically is theological and involves a recrudescence, spiritual improvement of human character that will synchronize with our almost matchless advances in science, art, literature and all material and cultural developments of the past two thousand years. It must be of the spirit if we are to save the flesh...

There are some who for varying reasons would appease Red China [referring to the orean conflict]. They are blind to history's clear lesson, for history teaches with unmistakable emphasis that appeasement but begets new and bloodier war. It points to no single instance where this end has justified that means, where appeasement had led to more than a sham peace.
(Douglas MacArthur (1880-1964))
A wise man and one who feared God. He was right. We do well to heed.
Emphasis mine.

Israeli military men understand this. It's time we let them do it right and even help them, to the goal of ending the Islamic fundamentalist-induced mid-east conflict.

There can be no peace or negotiations with terrorists, ever. It is surely a form of moral insanity to pretend one can or ought to try to negotiate peace with kamikaze terrorists. Their very existence and nature prevent it.