Worthy News: Hamas: Arrests act of war - Ynet News

[nebula]

If you are up to some reading:

History of Hezbollah: Hezbollah

One important point to note:

UN resolution 1559

Main article: United Nations Security Council Resolution 1559

U.N. Security Council Resolution 1559 was a resolution sponsored by France and the United States and adopted on September 2, 2004. It called upon Syria to end its military presence in Lebanon by withdrawing its forces and to cease intervening in internal Lebanese politics. The resolution also called for "the disbanding and disarmament of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias". The Lebanese army did not disarm or disband Hezbollah prior to the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict.

History of the conflict: Israel-Lebanon Conflict, 2006

Beginning of conflict

see: Ayta al-Sha`b incident

At 9:05 AM local time (06:05 CET), on 12 July 2006, Hezbollah initiated a rocket and mortar attack on Israeli military positions and on the towns of Even Menahem and Mattat, injuring 11 soldiers and civilians[citation needed]. Afterwards, a ground contingent of Hezbollah militants attacked two Israeli armored Humvees on a routine patrol along the Israel-Lebanon border near the Israeli village of Zar

[amor]

If you are up to some reading:

History of Hezbollah: Hezbollah

One important point to note:

UN resolution 1559

Main article: United Nations Security Council Resolution 1559

U.N. Security Council Resolution 1559 was a resolution sponsored by France and the United States and adopted on September 2, 2004. It called upon Syria to end its military presence in Lebanon by withdrawing its forces and to cease intervening in internal Lebanese politics. The resolution also called for "the disbanding and disarmament of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias". The Lebanese army did not disarm or disband Hezbollah prior to the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict.

History of the conflict: Israel-Lebanon Conflict, 2006

Beginning of conflict

see: Ayta al-Sha`b incident

At 9:05 AM local time (06:05 CET), on 12 July 2006, Hezbollah initiated a rocket and mortar attack on Israeli military positions and on the towns of Even Menahem and Mattat, injuring 11 soldiers and civilians[citation needed]. Afterwards, a ground contingent of Hezbollah militants attacked two Israeli armored Humvees on a routine patrol along the Israel-Lebanon border near the Israeli village of Zar

[nebula]

From the beginning, I heard that the Israelis were kidnapped from Israeli soil.

The beginning being the beginning....

[Guest shiloh357]

The kidnapping is what bothers me. The latest reports are that the soldiers were kidnapped off Israeli soil, while the initial reports were that the soldiers were taken while they were in Lebanon. The day after the hostages were taken, the story changed.

You have been misinformed.

[Guest shiloh357]

The kidnapping is what bothers me. The latest reports are that the soldiers were kidnapped off Israeli soil, while the initial reports were that the soldiers were taken while they were in Lebanon. The day after the hostages were taken, the story changed.

You have been misinformed.

I am just stating what the early news articles reported.

I have been researching this since I got home and can see plainly that the story was originally one thing, and then turned to another thing.

None of us have personal knowledge, as we were not there, none of us can say for sure what the truth really is.

Those who are there, can. The media is never friendly to Israel and is not above distorting their reporting to discredit any attempt of Israel to defend itself against terrorism.

[nebula]

Boy - researching is a bear!

Anyway - I found this from an article dated to July 12: WTOP news

Hezbollah guerrillas crossed the border and launched a surprise attack on two Israeli Humvees, killing three soldiers, wounding two and capturing the two others, the Israeli army said.

Israel quickly sent armored vehicles over the border on a rescue mission, but one of the tanks rolled over a mine, killing the four soldiers inside and sparking a battle that killed another soldier, the army said.

Israel sent warplanes deep into southern Lebanon _ targeting bridges, roads and Hezbollah positions. Two Lebanese civilians and a Hezbollah fighter were killed.

Also:

Nasrallah said the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers had been plotted for the past five months, calling the move "our natural right and the only logical way ... to highlight internationally the suffering of thousands of Lebanese, Palestinian and Arab prisoners in Israeli jails."

Note: WTOP out of Washington DC is anything but Conservative Republican leaning.

[Guest shiloh357]

I also do not think it is wise to say one side is always right no matter what they do and the other side is always wrong.

No one is saying that.

[nebula]

Hey Katy Ann -

I'm trying to make sense out of the Forbes article you posted, and when it stated "across the boarder" it is not clear who crossed who's border when the soldiers were kidnapped.

It is clear that Israel crossed Lebanon's border to try to get the soldiers back, but as for the initial clash it is not clear at all.

So, if you are wanting to show us reports that Israel was the initial agressor, you are going to need to post a different article that isn't so vague.

[nebula]

The militant group Hezbollah captured two Israeli soldiers during clashes Wednesday across the border in southern Lebanon, prompting a swift reaction from Israel, which sent ground forces into its neighbor to look for them.

The forces were trying to keep the soldiers' captors from moving them deeper into Lebanon, Israeli government officials said on condition of anonymity.

The Israeli military would not confirm the report.

Earlier, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert called an emergency Cabinet meeting and said Lebanese guerrillas would pay a "heavy price" for Wednesday's attacks.

The article metions Hezbollah as the subject before stating "across the border." If Israel was the initial attacker, the sentence is worded very poorly to convey this.

Considering how early the report was, the most likely explanation is that information was scant and confusing. Later reports made it clear that Hezbollah was in Israel first because by then everyone had the time to research what happened.

It sounds like this reporter heard there were clashes, heard that Israelis got captured, and heard of Israel's response by sending ground forces into Lebanon. Notice it did not say it sent "more" ground forces, which would have been the case if Israel troops were already in there.

[nebula]

Already tried . . . .

I don't have another 45 minutes to kill just to find one article again.