Get the soldiers back. Disarm Hezbollah, destroy all rockets and arms. Hold Lebanon accountable for terrorist sanctuary within its borders..
Then ceasefire.
2 posted on
08/11/2006 2:51:30 AM PDT by
D-fendr
To: Republicain
Maybe I am missing something but
1. Israel is bombing Beruit how will a peace keeping force in the south stop whatever is going on in Beirut?
2. The Litani river has been referred to as Isreal's natural northern border - this choice of a ceasefire line is gonna generate some conspiracy theorists.
3. What will the French do when Hezbollah attacks and Israel fires back and French troops are in the middle?
3 posted on
08/11/2006 2:53:29 AM PDT by
gondramB
To: Republicain
Without a solution for the abducted soldiers, it will not be enough to conclude the war. Israel may not get everything it wants but the return of its soldiers ought to be a non-negotiable prerequisite for any ceasefire.
(Go Israel, Go! Slap 'Em Down Hezbullies.)
4 posted on
08/11/2006 2:55:08 AM PDT by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
To: Republicain
Israel spends a month bombing with high tech weapons and can't get 2 soldiers back. Now they agree to a UN halt. LOL.
Israel loses.
5 posted on
08/11/2006 2:56:02 AM PDT by
zarf
To: Republicain
I hope the soldiers are still alive!
6 posted on
08/11/2006 3:10:02 AM PDT by
ChristianDefender
(Never Give Your Enemy (ROP) A Foothold.)
To: Republicain
Peacekeepers. What a frickin' joke.
Let us turn back a page, and look at another hotspot in the world, now 'protected' by peacekeepers. I speak, of course, of Haiti. Some folks might remember that chunk of land to the south.
The peacekeepers were charged, what, a year and a half ago, with disarming the militias that were terrorizing that nation. Today, they're telling the militias to turn in their weapons. Surrender or die, says Haiti's government, whereas the peacekeepers are saying 'we need more people to maintain the peace.' Not to gather weapons, not to take out the militias, but to 'maintain the peace.'
That translates, actually, to 'keep our people from being kidnapped every few weeks.' Because the UN Peacekeepers in Haiti have been an abysmal joke.
They're going to be just as effective in Lebanon. Or rather, they're going to be just as effective as those UN observation posts in Southern Lebanon. The UN is already there, they've been there for, what, two decades?
Useless crap.
7 posted on
08/11/2006 3:20:11 AM PDT by
kingu
(Yeah, I'll vote in 2006, just as soon as a party comes along who listens.)
To: Republicain
9 posted on
08/11/2006 3:37:24 AM PDT by
SkyPilot
To: Republicain
Israel is falling into a trap, the idea that this will solve the crisis is insane, The surrender monkey's will assist Hezbollah, sos blue helmet syndrome.
10 posted on
08/11/2006 3:57:38 AM PDT by
boomop1
(there you go again)
To: Republicain
A senior government official also told AFP that the agreement currently on the table would not bring home the two Israeli soldiers captured by the Lebanese militia during the deadly July 12 attack that triggered Israel's offensive on Lebanon. This should topple the Israeli gov't.
Now, if Israel goes for this deal, how much more likely are they going to sign that 7yr covenant with the Anti-Christ?
Israel has become a 'peace at any price' nation.
11 posted on
08/11/2006 4:36:32 AM PDT by
fortheDeclaration
(Am I therefore become your enemy because I tell you the truth? (Gal.4:16))
To: Republicain
This is insane. Hezbuttheads will not give up on their destruction of Israel just because they are moved from point A to point B. This deal is a chance for them to regroup, rearm and renew their pledge of destruction.........
16 posted on
08/11/2006 5:21:06 AM PDT by
Red Badger
(Is Castro dead yet?........)
To: Republicain
If this ceasefire goes forward it will be a victory for Hezbollah and Olmert should be bounced out of power.
19 posted on
08/11/2006 6:22:15 AM PDT by
Prysson
To: dennisw; Cachelot; Nix 2; veronica; Catspaw; knighthawk; Alouette; Optimist; weikel; Lent; GregB; ..
2006israelwar> 2006israelwar or
WOT [War on Terror]
----------------------------
20 posted on
08/11/2006 6:47:23 AM PDT by
SJackson
(The Pilgrims—Doing the jobs Native Americans wouldn't do!)
To: Republicain
Just who is going to guarantee anything about what Hezbollah will or won't do??
Who is going to make sure that Syria does not rearm Hezbollah??
Why are we pretending that the French have any business whatsoever in leading this "International Force"??
The solution to Peace in South Lebanon revolves around taking out the resupply routes to Hezbollah that lie through Syria, and originate in Iran. Anything less guarantees more attackes on Israel later, with more and improved weaponry.
21 posted on
08/11/2006 7:27:10 AM PDT by
Bean Counter
(Stout hearts!!)
He added that if the resolution currently being discussed by diplomats at the United Nations was adopted, "we will have changed the rules of the game despite not obtaining everything we wanted."
One obvious disadvantage will be when the Hizzies resume (and accelerate) the missile launches. Israel will not be able to roll directly into Lebanon. However, continued attacks would also mean that the UNSC would be directly responsible and have to become directly involved in the destruction of Hizbollah.
22 posted on
08/11/2006 8:50:08 AM PDT by
SunkenCiv
(updated my FR profile on Thursday, August 10, 2006. https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson