Skip to comments.
Lebanon envoy: Truce will be Israel's last
ynetnews ^
| 08.14.06, 05:43
Posted on 08/13/2006 8:16:47 PM PDT by LANDWARRIOR
Lebanon envoy: Truce will be Israel's last
(Excerpt) Read more at ynetnews.com ...
TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: israel; lebanon; olmert
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-69 next last
To: LANDWARRIOR
"Lebanon will be, I think, the last state to sign a peace treaty with Israel," UN ambassador Nouhad Mahmoud
Is headline accurate? Is the so-called diplomat actually talking about the cease-fire agreement, or is he really talking about a "peace treaty" (which is not what the UN Security Council voted about). What show was this on?? Did the weasel journalists press him to explain why he thinks Lebanon will be the "last" to sign a peace treaty??? Is he saying that the current government of Lebanon is unwilling to sign any peace treaty, or what?
41
posted on
08/13/2006 9:51:32 PM PDT
by
Enchante
(There are 3 kinds of lies: Lies, Damned Lies, and Mainstream Journalism)
To: starfish923
Uh...How wrong can someone be. The Romans as Pagans controlled this land from 63 through 313. Now this control was established by killing the 580,000 to 1,300,000 Jews who happened to live there. For the next 200 years Christians were persecuted just about equally to Jews because most of them just happened to be Jews. One could say this land finally came under "Christian" control when Emperor Constantine issued the Edict of Milan ending the persecution of Christians. Now Constantine was essentially the last Emperor over all of Rome. The next 80 years seeing the final division of the Empire into the the West (Roman) and East (Greek) or Byzantine Empire.
However, in 634 first Islamic Caliphate ceased this territory and held it until about 1095. From 1099 to 1187, the Kingdom of Jerusalem (Christian) held the land. In 1187, Saladin took back Jerusalem and over the next hundred years the Kingdom was extinguished.
So lets total this up. Christian control years = 409 years.
42
posted on
08/13/2006 9:51:54 PM PDT
by
dalight
To: All
Cease fire, cease fire!!! By the way, we're going to kill you. Cease fire!!!
To: LANDWARRIOR
Lebanon, who started this war, cried to the UN to stop it when it bit off too much. UNfortunatly Lebanon did not learn its lesson because it got its fat taken out of the fire far too early.
This in the end, will be the destruction of Lebanon, for this war will continue as Syria and Iran use Lebanon as its chess board. The slaughter will be great, and Lebanon will in the end be the property of Israel when Damascus ceases to exist.
Diplomats never stopped a war in history, they exist to start them. The military stops wars, when they win.
44
posted on
08/13/2006 9:57:27 PM PDT
by
American in Israel
(A wise man's heart directs him to the right, but the foolish mans heart directs him toward the left.)
To: mass55th
That's what I was thinking. Doesn't 1559 still stand?
45
posted on
08/13/2006 9:58:05 PM PDT
by
bethtopaz
(There will be peace in the Mideast when Arabs love their children more than they hate Israel. -Meir)
To: txrangerette
Frankly, I just don't see how, given a mountain of historical references, anyone could EVER trust any muslime government in the middle east, democratically elected or not.
46
posted on
08/13/2006 10:06:55 PM PDT
by
frankiep
(I respect Islamofacists more than the American left - at least they ADMIT that they hate the US.)
To: Enchante
Is headline accurate? Is the so-called diplomat actually talking about the cease-fire agreement, or is he really talking about a "peace treaty" (which is not what the UN Security Council voted about). What show was this on?? Did the weasel journalists press him to explain why he thinks Lebanon will be the "last" to sign a peace treaty??? Is he saying that the current government of Lebanon is unwilling to sign any peace treaty, or what?He is saying that he thinks Israel will be destroyed before anyone else has a chance to sign another treaty with it.
47
posted on
08/13/2006 10:12:21 PM PDT
by
mvpel
(Michael Pelletier)
To: mvpel
"He is saying that he thinks Israel will be destroyed before anyone else has a chance to sign another treaty with it."
That's what I thought, but the article and his words are exceptionally careless if that's what he meant, because this cease-fire is not a "peace treaty" in the normal diplomatic sense of the words. That's one reason I am incredulous that no journalists pressed to get him to explain what the h*** he meant. And of course if he does mean that he wants Israel to be destroyed then that is all the more indication (if any were needed) that the government of Lebanon cannot be trusted for an instant and that there is no real chance that this cease-fire agreement will actually be implemented. Israel must annihilate the Hezi-Nazis, it is an existential battle for Israel, period.
48
posted on
08/13/2006 10:17:01 PM PDT
by
Enchante
(There are 3 kinds of lies: Lies, Damned Lies, and Mainstream Journalism)
To: dalight
Wasn't Saladin a Turk, not an Arab? Didn't Seljuk Turks conquer Constantinople in 1554 and establish the Ottoman empire until 1918? Talk about occupation! No wonder these folks are touchy about that subject.
To: Enchante
You're incredulous that the "journalists" who bring us tales of Israeli atrocities every day of the week while ignoring attacks on Jewish children didn't press him on it?
Not only did the journalists know exactly what the h*** he meant, most of them are in fact working towards the same goal by different means.
50
posted on
08/13/2006 10:23:44 PM PDT
by
mvpel
(Michael Pelletier)
To: goldstategop
Israel had to give the UN a chance to so whatever, and when it fails they will have a reason to go in 50% harder.
Wars are usually between nations, so I don't get the modern day military targets only deal.
Seems that is a mistake doomed to failure that was begun during Vietnam.
If there is a war, fight and let the winners dictate the terms of peace.
The end.
51
posted on
08/13/2006 10:26:03 PM PDT
by
A CA Guy
(God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
To: mvpel
Well as my tagline indicates I no longer expect anything but lies and vicious propaganda from most journalists. On the other hand, I still demand that they do a professional and honest job, even if more than 90% of them have no idea what that would mean....
52
posted on
08/13/2006 10:26:46 PM PDT
by
Enchante
(There are 3 kinds of lies: Lies, Damned Lies, and Mainstream Journalism)
To: mass55th
"so that there will be no weapons without the consent of the government of Lebanon"
So by permitting them to remain armed, Lebanon just consented to Hizbollah's behavior, and committed an act of war by adoption. They can no longer claim to be an innocent third party.
To: MrEdd
Mekhtoub! (It is written)
54
posted on
08/13/2006 10:55:48 PM PDT
by
sheik yerbouty
( Make America and the world a jihad free zone!)
To: My Favorite Headache
They forketh the tongue and parteth the hooves, but cannot cheweth the Quds..
55
posted on
08/13/2006 10:57:13 PM PDT
by
sheik yerbouty
( Make America and the world a jihad free zone!)
To: dalight
The Romans had ruled that part of the world long before 63 AD. And although they had at various times suppressed Jewish agitation through harsh measures, it wasn't until the "Jewish War" 66-70 AD that they killed and dispersed the Jews en masse.
Roman persecution of Christians throughout the Empire was a spasmodic affair for the next 250 years; some emperors left the Christians alone, while others were quite brutal.
56
posted on
08/13/2006 11:16:28 PM PDT
by
karnage
To: LANDWARRIOR
This is why Lebanon is NOT an innocent by stander. Where were they when they were suppossed to implement UN resolution 1559?
What they have done is enable hezbollah, and they are responsible for what has happened
57
posted on
08/13/2006 11:40:10 PM PDT
by
John999
To: karnage
After Harrod's death, the Romans went from allowing the Jews the facade of self rule to having a Roman Governor who was the political authority. The first war and the sacking of the Temple was an attempt to establish dominance and total control over Judea and though it was horrible, it wasn't until 133-5 that Rome finally employed its own version of a "final solution" because of Simon bar Kokhba's revolt.
My point though was that Christian control of the Holy Lands has been tenacious at best and that the Roman period was primarily Hellenistic in nature rather than Christian.
58
posted on
08/14/2006 12:44:20 AM PDT
by
dalight
To: mass55th
We have winner! And Lebanon abjectly failed to implement 1559.
59
posted on
08/14/2006 1:25:33 AM PDT
by
La Enchiladita
(Make your choice and save your tears....AM YISRAEL CHAI!)
To: rockrr
I would normally agreed with you, but in this case, I think that Israel is being run by cowards.
I sincerely hope it is the last one Israel signs, or any democracy, for that matter.
Only overwhelming defeat will ever win.
60
posted on
08/14/2006 2:17:04 AM PDT
by
MonroeDNA
(Soros is a communist goon, controlled by communist goons.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-69 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson