CARI Infonet

 Forgot password?
 Register

ADVERTISEMENT

Author: ef/x

Israel planned for Lebanon war

[Copy link]
Post time 15-3-2007 03:42 PM | Show all posts

Reply #80 areguard's post

yang last tu masih mampu tersenyum..lepas kelaur navy ramai syt elektronik nak pakai tu
Reply

Use magic Report


ADVERTISEMENT


Post time 15-3-2007 03:45 PM | Show all posts
Leaving Lebanon Behind
An Israeli director is honored for his unsparing new film.

By Joanna Chen
Newsweek International
March 12, 2007 issue - At the Berlin Film Festival last month, Joseph Cedar looked more like a bashful schoolboy than a director to rival Robert De Niro and Steven Soderbergh. So it was especially surprising when the Israeli filmmaker beat out those two veterans for the festival's best-director prize for his latest movie, "Beaufort," about the abrupt Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon in 2000, after 18 years of occupation. Set in a concrete maze of bunkers and trenches atop a mountain outpost, the film follows a group of soldiers battling not so much the enemy as their own fears for survival. In a stroke of precipitous timing, the film梬hich opens in Israel this week and globally later this year梬as completed just five weeks before the second Lebanon war broke out in July 2006, plunging Israel and its northern neighbor into a fresh round of fighting.

Cedar's award is one of the highest honors ever bestowed on an Israeli director. Until recently, film was not considered a high priority by the country's cultural establishment. But over the past five years, more funding has been allocated to the industry梐nd it's paying off. Last year a Palestinian-Israeli co-production, "Paradise Now," reaped a Golden Globe for its provocative presentation of suicide bombers; two other films, "Sweet Mud" and "The Bubble," received accolades at this year's Sundance and Berlin festivals. "Cedar comes from a new, more self-aware generation of Israeli filmmakers who are not afraid to expose their social concerns to the world and are being given a chance to show it," says film critic Nahman Ingber, the artistic director of the Rabinovich Foundation, which funds Israeli films. "He knows how to hold your soul when he tells a story."

Cedar's background certainly gives him plenty of fodder for his craft. His family emigrated from New York when he was a child, and he grew up in an Orthodox neighborhood of Jerusalem with five brothers and sisters. In his first two films, "Time of Favor" and "Campfire," Cedar explored this community, exposing the dark side of messianic beliefs and contrasting the high ideals of the group with the petty lives of its individual members. Before making the films, Cedar spent time cloistered in a yeshiva. While writing the screenplay for "Time of Favor," he lived for a year in a hard-core Jewish settlement on the West Bank. As a full-fledged member of the religious community, he was initially accepted by members of the remote settlement. But eventually they grew suspicious of his lack of conformity; among other things, he was a bachelor who held no job. "I was alone and I was asking questions all the time, speaking to people and trying to befriend people," says Cedar. "It turned me into a perfect secret-service agent."

By the time he left, he had made plenty of enemies. But he remains unapologetic. "There's a betrayal in every storyteller's psyche," he says. "You can't tell an honest story without being willing to let the story override your loyalties."

In "Beaufort," Cedar shatters the mirror of heroism that has been held up to soldiers for generations. Young troops, conditioned to obey, become sitting ducks for an enemy they cannot see. "Are you here by mistake or did you want to be here?" an exhausted soldier on late-night guard duty asks his comrade. "I wanted to be here and that's the mistake," comes his grim reply.

The lessons surrounding the futility of their mission extend far beyond the Israeli-Lebanese border. "It's a story of any mountain in any battle," says Cedar. "Soldiers died to capture it, died to protect it and then found out its insignificance." In the director's unvarnished world, the hero is the one with the survival instinct to stand up and make decisions for himself. The true act of bravery is to leave the post where others died, to take down the flag and descend the mountain梬herever that mountain may be.
Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 15-3-2007 09:09 PM | Show all posts
Originally posted by Robotech at 15-3-2007 02:39 PM
Had the Israelis not occupying most Palestinian lands, all those thing won't happen.

Who says the Palestinian land belongs to Israelis? Even UN do not recognised the occupied land as Israel rightful hegemony since 1967?

Are you smoking crack or what?
.

Had the arabs not occupied jewish land, this would not have happened at all.
UN does not recognise this palestinian state, much less palestinian land.
The arabs rejected what UN gave them and cannot now turn back and claim what they have rejected.





They're not soft. Look at more than a thousand Lebanese kids, womenfolk, oldfolk that perished in the massive assault.

The israelis dropped warning pamphlets before they bombed. But the hezbos kept them from running because they wanted more civilians dead. so any death of innocent civilians lie on the fault of the hezbos, not jews.



Look at IDF, got humiliated by amateur guerillas ... the troopers get scared stiffs without the reinforcement from Israeli artys & tanks .. hell, the tankers are even vulnerable.

First of all, teh hezbos aren'tr amateurs and they hardly scratched the IDF.



Like some IDF trooper who says, 'These Hezbollah fight to the death'. Yeah, while most IDF troopers hunkered down amongst tanks column ... & let the Israeli air force do the pounding.

Stinkin' cowards!

Really? where is this idf trooper?
if the hezbos are so brave, why do they use human shields? why do they mix among civilians and wore civies? why don't they come out and fight like true warriors? Fvckin cowards terrorists!

[ Last edited by  Debmey at 15-3-2007 09:11 PM ]
Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 15-3-2007 09:14 PM | Show all posts
Originally posted by mat_toro at 15-3-2007 02:59 PM
It can be wrong when you do it by making a buffer using other people's land... what say you if we built a fence in Geylang??

If singapore attack you, you have the right to defend yourself, even if it means building a fence in geylang.





Didn't you advocated for the UN before??  The UN does not recognise the land the fence was built on as Israeli land... T

The UN is a corrupt and useless organisation.



he Palestinians wouldn't have to resort to terrorism if the zionists listened and actually co-operated and kept their word on the many treaties broken before this by the zionists themselves... The zionists gave autonomy but then intensified their incursions into Palestinian homes and became trigger happy plus they even abducted half the Palestinian govt members!!  What hypocrisy!!

There is no justification of terrorism whatsoever. You people have weak morals.
Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 15-3-2007 09:17 PM | Show all posts
Originally posted by rurouni_khairul at 15-3-2007 03:05 PM

Non-muslim are allowed to enter into Mecca and Medina with the permission of the authority first (Saudi Arabian government) because the National Geographic crew members from the United States once been permitted to enter into the Holy cities, with permission of course.


Why is there a need for restriction in the first plkace at all? What kinda spirituality is that?
How do you know the NG crew wasn't Muslim?





I personally won't be visiting Vatican City in the near future...why should I?

You and everyone else isn't restricted to visit the Vatican.
Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 15-3-2007 09:21 PM | Show all posts
Enough of the arguing. All of you guys.

Debmey has a point here, but recently i read in the papers about a new Arab-Israeli peace deal to be endorsed by the Arab League, and then proposed to the Israelis. Could someone confirm this. (I think it's in the Straits Times or something.)

Terms include:

Continued, guaranteed, and full recognition of Israel forever by all Arab states, and vice versa.
Indefinete Peace (aka forever)
Creation of Palestinian State
Continued, guaranteed and full recoginiton of Palestine by Israel and UN
Trade pacts and economic co-operation
Military co-operation (not sure)

It definetely looks attractive for Israel and the Arabs here, especially after their failure to destroy Israel, this would be very beneficial to both sides.
Reply

Use magic Report

Follow Us
Post time 15-3-2007 09:22 PM | Show all posts
Originally posted by mat_toro at 15-3-2007 03:12 PM

The zionists failed becouse they're soft alright... they spent all their time shooting at rock throwing villagers when they met someone who actually shot back they haven't a clue what to do...

.

Rock throwers? ever heard of pallywood?





The Hizbullah dont care how much damage they took... you really dont understand guerilla warfare dont you... last time also you've proven yourself ignorant of guerilla warfare... no need to prove it again...

The hezbos don't care how many civilians died, they wnat more civilians to die so they can blame it on jews.
Thats call terrorists warfare.
Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 15-3-2007 09:22 PM | Show all posts
'Had the arabs not occupied jewish land, this would not have happened at all.
UN does not recognise this palestinian state, much less palestinian land.
The arabs rejected what UN gave them and cannot now turn back and claim what they have rejected.'


It was the Jewish migration en-masse following the end WWII that triggered the British to end the Mandate and call for the UN to form two states. There were barely any Jews before the migration and suddenly because of European sympathy, an Israeli state was erected. It was not done bona fide basis. That there was no clear boundary for this new state. That was why the Arabs rejected the UN in 1947 initiative.

Eventually a war began.
Reply

Use magic Report


ADVERTISEMENT


Post time 15-3-2007 09:27 PM | Show all posts
Originally posted by mentosonline at 15-3-2007 09:21 PM
Enough of the arguing. All of you guys.

Debmey has a point here, but recently i read in the papers about a new Arab-Israeli peace deal to be endorsed by the Arab League, and then proposed to t ...



They wanted to wipe out Israel and push all jews into the sea up front but they failed because God was with his people.
After all these years of hostility, they want to sue for peace after rejecting peace with the jews so many times.
Be very clear that the real intent is not peace but a temporary ceasefire for more hostilities later.
Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 15-3-2007 09:30 PM | Show all posts
'Debmey has a point here, but recently i read in the papers about a new Arab-Israeli peace deal to be endorsed by the Arab League, and then proposed to the Israelis. Could someone confirm this. (I think it's in the Straits Times or something.')

This proposal was first tabled in 2002. It requires Israel to return all OPT (post 1967) and lands(including Syrian Golan) and assert the right of return of Palestinian refugees. In reciprocity, Arab coutnries will recognise Israel and curb further militant acts and groups. Notwithstanding the Oslo Peace Accords, the Arab peace proposal was the first in history.

However, I believe Israel will reject the peace proposal. They had built too many settlements in the OPT. Too much political pressure to not to make peace. Israel now will look for other excuses not to make peace.

One of the escape routes is to look to the Road Map to delay, despite the Arab peace initiative is at hand.

[ Last edited by  RainbowSix at 15-3-2007 11:18 PM ]
Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 15-3-2007 09:31 PM | Show all posts
There was. It was just complicated. Look.

Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 15-3-2007 09:33 PM | Show all posts
Originally posted by RainbowSix at 15-3-2007 09:22 PM
It was the Jewish migration en-masse following the end WWII that triggered the British to end the Mandate and call for the UN to form two states.

Eventually a war began.


There was enmass arab immigration from egypt, syria, yemen and iraq too. The palestinians of today and mostly descendents of these immigrants.




There were barely any Jews before the migration and suddenly because of European sympathy, an Israeli state was erected.

Wrong, the jews were always there and made majority all the time.
European sympathy? so why did the Brits prevent jewsih immigration and also team up with the arabs to kill jews during the war?





It was not done bona fide basis. That there was no clear boundary for this new state.
That was why the Arabs rejected the UN in 1947 initiative.

wrong again. there was clear boundaries offered by the UN.
The rabs rejected it because they wanted israel all for themselves and to kill all jews.
They cannot stand having a jewsih state because they have been killing and oppressing jews for more than a thousand years.
Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 15-3-2007 09:34 PM | Show all posts

Reply #90 RainbowSix's post

Not all. Just the ones Israel got since 1967. Israel can keep all the lands it acquired from Arab aggression from 1948.
The main reason why Israel would reject the plan though, is the Golan Heights. Israel has built many facilities there and control all the surrounding nations' water supply (except Egypt duh), as well as it's own.
Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 15-3-2007 09:36 PM | Show all posts
Originally posted by RainbowSix at 15-3-2007 09:30 PM
'Debmey has a point here, but recently i read in the papers about a new Arab-Israeli peace deal to be endorsed by the Arab League, and then proposed to the Israelis. Could someone confirm this. ( ...


yu seem to be halucinating and devoid of reality.

it was the arabs who rejected peace so many times, not the jews.
Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 15-3-2007 09:36 PM | Show all posts
Regarding water, the Arabs built some dams on the Jordan River to divert all the water supply, but in either 1967 or 1973 when Israel entered Golan Heights, she destroyed most of the dams. It is because of water that Israel might reject this deal.
Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 15-3-2007 09:37 PM | Show all posts

Reply #92 Debmey's post

'wrong again. there was clear boundaries offered by the UN.
The rabs rejected it because they wanted israel all for themselves and to kill all jews.'

Of course on paper/map there is one. But it was done hastily not enough consultation. As I said, it wasnt done on bonafide basis. Rather support for Zionism and sympathy for the Jews.

If you want to argue in biblical proportions, then go ahead. Arabs before Islam was different. They even buried female toddlers.

[ Last edited by  RainbowSix at 15-3-2007 09:43 PM ]
Reply

Use magic Report


ADVERTISEMENT


Post time 15-3-2007 09:40 PM | Show all posts

Reply #93 mentosonline's post

You see, when Israel rejects something, its always fine. They refuse to withdraw from Golan Heights, its fine. Why is that? But when the Arabs didnt follow, you blame the Arabs.

And yes, the OPT lands following the 6 Days of War.

[ Last edited by  RainbowSix at 15-3-2007 11:14 PM ]
Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 15-3-2007 09:43 PM | Show all posts

Reply #94 Debmey's post

Up to 1973, that was true, but after the Yom Kippur War, when the much larger Arab forces were unable to destroy the Israelis, even after surprising them on their most holy day, they realised that Israel cannot be defeated militarily, and hence the peace process was started. The Lebanon conflict was an anomaly because Israel fought with it's hands tied, as it tried to reduce loss of civilian life (although not very successful), and was fighting a hidden enemy which didn't dare to fight Israel head-on. Even now, I'd say, hands-down, that Israel will still defeat the Arabs if the Arabs try another invasion. Don't forget, Israel has that nuclear deterrent, a US strategic reserve, and a US Armoured Calvary Regiment stationed there. That ACR alone is capable of taking out an entire armoured division alone, and has beaten Israeli armour formations (which are among the best in the world) of similar size in exercises.
Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 15-3-2007 09:43 PM | Show all posts
Originally posted by RainbowSix at 15-3-2007 09:37 PM
wrong again. there was clear boundaries offered by the UN.
The rabs rejected it because they wanted israel all for themselves and to kill all jews.

Of course on paper/map there is one. But i ...




rubbish, the arabs didn't want consultation or peace, they expressly wanted to destroy Israel.
Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 15-3-2007 09:45 PM | Show all posts
Originally posted by RainbowSix at 15-3-2007 09:40 PM
You see, when Israel does it, it fine. They dont want to withdraw from Golan, its fine. Why is that? When the Arabs didnt follow, you blame the Arabs.

And yes, the lands follwoing the 6 Days  ...



and why shld israel be expected to return any lands when syria is openly hostile and threatening?
Reply

Use magic Report

You have to log in before you can reply Login | Register

Points Rules

 

ADVERTISEMENT



 

ADVERTISEMENT


 


ADVERTISEMENT
Follow Us

ADVERTISEMENT


Mobile|Archiver|Mobile*default|About Us|CARI Infonet

29-3-2024 04:48 PM GMT+8 , Processed in 0.066939 second(s), 42 queries .

Powered by Discuz! X3.4

Copyright © 2001-2021, Tencent Cloud.

Quick Reply To Top Return to the list