Talk:2006 Hezbollah cross-border raid

message: from the figaro article
*[Jumblatt] In view of the Israeli military offensive against the Palestinians in Gaza and the issue of the Lebanese prisoners in Israel, Hezbollah's logic could justify these kidnappings. The Arabs are exasperated by the intensity of the Israeli repression in Gaza. Their initial response is to support Hezbollah. But Hezbollah is playing a very dangerous game by kidnapping these two soldiers. We are no longer where we were 10 years ago. Israel has evacuated Lebanon. These kidnappings extend beyond our country's borders. Hezbollah is raising the stakes, supported by Iran and Syria, which has during the past year become a satellite state of Teheran. Because of the lack of Arab or Western initiative in connection with the Israeli-Palestinian question, Iran and Syria have taken over, and within this context Lebanon is a natural battlefield.
what is meant by "these kidnappings extend beyond our country's borders" is that they are influenced by Syria, Teheran, and events in Gaza. He is not offering an opinion whether it is a "cross-border" raid. Will314159 13:32, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ahhm, I'm not sure about that. Nevertheless, this quote is more suitable to the Lebanese responds to the Hezbollah attack. Somebody has time to write this section? Here's a start. Fuzzy 17:30, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jumblatt's statement 

message: This page should be also protected. Flayer 09:48, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Funny... Dozens of international journalists were near those burt jeeps inside Israel. I would not "check" anything, if you have reliable references about your claim, so add them as well! And yes, I need gourds to protect this article from YOUR propoganda. Flayer 13:05, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

text: nonsense... Flayer 14:17, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Zar'it-Ayta ash-Shab incident]] 

message: Haaretz.com
Any logical place to put this information ? imi2 08:12, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hezbollah border-line fighters mastered Hebrew 

message: From the start, there have been some editors who question the accepted story that the incident happened on the Israeli side of the border, stating instead that it happened on the Lebanese side. However, the only source for this claim is a DPA news flash, written by a DPA correspondent in Lebanon a few hours after it happened. The content of the piece makes it obvious that it was despatched very early, as the Israeli's didn't yet want to confirm the capture, and as there is no mentioning of any dead Israelis - so this piece may very well have been the first story about the incident.
Nobody outside of DPA knows who the correspondent was, but, considering the size of DPA, it's doubtful that they keep employed staff in Lebanon, so it was probably a stringer with good local contacts; and he/she can either have been misinformed by someone or have misunderstood something. Stringers are paid per story, so they are always in a hurry to get a good story quickly to their client, especially if they think they have a scoop - and mistakes easily happen in a rushed situation.
What is clear, is that no other news agencies, newspapers or TV/radio channels seem to have ever mentioned any police statement or any claim by Hezbollah that it should have happened on the Israeli side (except those who published the DPA story). And when Nasrallah announced the capture on 13 July he also didn't say that it happened in Lebanon - and he definitely would have if that had been the case. Also, the Lebanese government has never questioned that it happened on the Israeli side, even though the DPA story claims that the government's own police force has said so. So, I think we can let that issue rest and assume that it was a mistake by a rushed stringer - unless, of course, someone can find any reliable references which aren't just a re-write of the DPA story . Thomas Blomberg 04:35, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Maybe Yousaf465 can enlighten us. Fuzzy 21:05, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I cannot remember where I read it. But apparently the Hezbollah website initially claimed that the capture took place on the Lebanon side of the border. Then after UNIFIL stated the opposite, the website changed to the UN version. The incident is described in the UNIFIL report here. CiaPolitica 23:38, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Lebanese police story 

message: To anyone who can edit the main article page, i think its fair to state in the Box that the result was a ( Hezbollah success), they have managed to capture israeli soldiers which was the main purpose behind the raid, they killed 3 israeli soldiers in the process, & they killed another 5 soldiers & destroyed an israeli tank while retreating with their prisoners, if that is not a success i don't know what is.
:That's a fair point. I've noted it as a Hezbollah tactical victory. -- ChrisO 10:23, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Won officially? How's that? So might suggest they won 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict but that's kind of irrelevant. Also, according to this page there are reported casulties on the Hezbollah side. In any case, number of deaths does not determine victory. The Soviet Union lost a lot of troops in the Eastern Front, far more then the Axis, during WW2 but no one is going to say they lost. Errors were made but arguably the primary reason for such a great number of deaths was because Stalin simply didn't care provided he won Nil Einne 23:27, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Results 

message: I took the liberty to sort up this talk page a bit. 
The article re/naming issue should be resolved. After the previous mix-up –
:
Due to the mix-up done by Yousaf465 and Flayer, I've placed a WP:SPLICE request. Please make changes only to this version, and don't update the Zar'it-Ayta ash-Shab incident artible until this mix-up is resolved. Thanks, Fuzzy 21:13, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, main article is back in old name. Talk page will follow in a few days. Cheers, Fuzzy 06:10, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

text: This page has already been moved 8 times with very little discussion. If you feel the page needs to be moved, please take it to WP:RM, since it obviously isn't uncontroversial. Thanks. - Bobet 23:31, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Is there any opposition to renaming this Zar'it incident or Zar'it attack? Keeping the Ayta a-Shaab part is just confusing, and could inspire more of the conspiracy theories. Let me know... TewfikTalk 16:04, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Zar'it-Ayta ash-Shab should be put as the most NPOV name.--TheFEARgod 12:04, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article name 

message: Do we know something about the landmine the tank ran onto? Was it a Hezbollah trap, or did the tank run into an old Israeli mine left from previous occupations? Is the Israeli landmines powerful enough to damage a Merkava II?? CiaPolitica 23:46, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Diferent b/ related point. A board of inquiry has found that a bulldozer should have preceded the tank to turn over mines with its blades. Cheers. Will314159 23:26, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I think recently added Washington post article source makes fairly clear the divistion commander was well aware Lebanon had defenses on their side of the border along the path he sent the tank down, though border defences were probably maintained by the Hezbollah militia. The tank hit the mine after it veered off the path. -- Kendrick7 23:57, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Landmine 

message: Is there a source beyond the Israeli paper that claims Hezbollah used this particular type of rocket? This would have been a violation of the Israeli-Lebanese Ceasefire Understanding, and therefore Israel's justification for war; thus is should be better sourced. I'm asking the same question on the main article. -- Kendrick7 02:53, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Katyusha? 

message: This has been discussed at enormous length at 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict as well. Most reputable sources use the term kidnap. Also, all wiki articles on these events should be consistent, which is why I changed it back to "kidnap", per 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict. -- Avi 07:20, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: People keep saying that, but it seems to me most WP:RS's we have here use "capture." Haaretz, CNN, and UPI use kidnap, Washington Post, Yahoo News India, Al-Jazeera, CBS, and the BBC use capture. (n.b. I just fixed Yahoo News India's title). I know that's not scientific, but I don't know where people are getting their numbers. -- Kendrick7talk 07:52, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I've been watching it, but I'm not willing to get involved in the reverts. Given how much time has passed, an RFC might be in order. Is anyone interested in writing one up? --Doc Tropics Message in a bottle 07:34, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Main article [[2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict]] 

message: There's currently a discussion about this at Talk:Hezbollah#"Capture" vs. "Kidnap" -- Kendrick7talk 22:23, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: April 2007 debate at [[Hezbollah]]

message: I'm not sure why the article refers to the Hizballah troops involved in the incident as "irregulars." Hizballah indeed has village irregulars, but they have 7K regular troops, who seem likely to have been the guys involved in this incident, given the fire-and-maneuver tactics involved. I vote we eliminate the irregular adjective. For a pretty good description of the Hizballah force structure, see <A HREF="Hizballah at War: A Military Assessment">http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC04.php?CID=260</A> at the Wash. Inst. for Near East Studies; I think anyone would be convinced we should drop irregular from this article. --jackbrown 10:47, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why are Hizballah forces involved here referred to as irregulars? 

message: This article has the timeline of infiltration happening on the day of the attack on the patrol. The latest article on border post 105 (that im aware of) has the infiltration happening a week prior to the attack, with a go signal on july 12 and the fence being disturbed to provoke a patrol. The attack on the patrol then being the signal for the rockets to provide covering fire and not a feint at all. How reliable/authoratative this account is I dont know as it may just be a case of whoever briefed him fitting the facts to a timeline of their choosing. Although it would make more sense than the account given in the article currently.
On or about July 5, a group of between 20 and 30 Hezbollah fighters infiltrated the Israeli border near the village of Aita Al-Shaab, barely 800 metres from the border fences. They set up camp on a thickly wooded slope above the Israeli patrol road. They pitched a small tent. They set up firing positions for two rocket-propelled grenade launchers. And then they waited.
On the morning of July 12, 2006, the infiltrators received the "go" signal. They touched the security fence at several points, triggering several Israeli patrols. Two Israeli Humvees were sent to border point 105. At 9.05am, as the first Humvee slowed to negotiate a turn in the road just below the firing positions, it was hit by two rocket-propelled grenades.
The firing of the grenades was the signal for a co-ordinated response by Hezbollah along the border. Waves of rocket and mortar fire were sent across into Israel to confuse their defence and buy time for the infiltrators. When the Israelis realised where its patrol had been attacked, the Hezbollah team had already left the scene. A heavy tank was dispatched to border post 105. etc —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.29.226.213 (talk) 14:42, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Timeline is bogus?

message: Just tell me on the merits, how you can have one leader give his pre-war expectations and not have the other leader's prewar expectation and plan. Delete one, then delete both. Or keep both in. I just don't get it. Unless the point is that only one POV is allowed? 
"On 27 August the Hezbollah chief Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah has said he would not have ordered the abduction of two Israeli soldiers if he had known it would lead to such a war. "Had we known that the kidnapping of the soldiers would have led to this, we would definitely not have done it," he said in an interview on Lebanese TV.[16] On the other side, however; Israeli P.M. Olmeret testified before the Winograd Comission that he had fully planned for an intensive war upon a kidnapping as early as March.1"
*Godspeed John Glenn! Will 11:50, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: What is wrong with balance, symmetry and a counterbalancing quote

message: As per previous discussion on Talk:Ehud Goldwasser, the articles Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev are virtually identical (aside from the one-paragraph bios) and they heavily overlap with the content here.  Splitting the info in three parts serves no purpose: it would be better to cover the incident and move the bios into new section here. Jpatokal (talk) 16:06, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge Ehud Goldwasser, Eldad Regev 

message: During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
* http://www.upc.org.uk/hasann12jul06.html
** In 2006 Hezbollah cross-border raid on 2011-05-26 02:04:23, 404 Not Found
** In 2006 Hezbollah cross-border raid on 2011-06-13 18:08:12, 404 Not Found
--JeffGBot (talk) 18:08, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link 

message: During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
* http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/world/ny-woleba224523762nov22,0,2969932.story?coll=ny-worldnews-headlines
** In 2000–2006 Shebaa Farms conflict on 2011-05-25 07:06:38, 404 Not Found
** In 2006 Hezbollah cross-border raid on 2011-05-26 02:04:31, 404 Not Found
** In 2000–2006 Shebaa Farms conflict on 2011-06-10 06:48:54, 404 Not Found
** In 2006 Hezbollah cross-border raid on 2011-06-13 18:08:15, 404 Not Found
--JeffGBot (talk) 18:08, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link 2 

message: During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
* http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5179434.stm}}
** In 2006 Hezbollah cross-border raid on 2011-05-26 02:04:24, 404 Not Found
** In 2006 Hezbollah cross-border raid on 2011-06-13 18:08:19, 404 Not Found
--JeffGBot (talk) 18:08, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link 3 

message: During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
* http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/07/20/mideast.diplomacy/index.html
** In 2006 Hezbollah cross-border raid on 2011-05-26 02:04:24, 404 Not Found
** In 2006 Hezbollah cross-border raid on 2011-06-13 18:08:30, 404 Not Found
--JeffGBot (talk) 18:08, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link 4 

message: During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
* http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/07/12/ap/world/mainD8IQFLNG6.shtml
** In 2006 Hezbollah cross-border raid on 2011-05-26 02:04:24, 404 Not Found
** In 2006 Hezbollah cross-border raid on 2011-06-13 18:08:41, 404 Not Found
--JeffGBot (talk) 18:09, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link 5 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 22:39, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Hizbollah3.tif Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on 2006 Hezbollah cross-border raid. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110521051825/http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=%2F2006%2F12%2F1%2Fworldupdates%2F2006-12-01T130226Z_01_NOOTR_RTRJONC_0_-278538-1&sec=Worldupdates to http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=%2F2006%2F12%2F1%2Fworldupdates%2F2006-12-01T130226Z_01_NOOTR_RTRJONC_0_-278538-1&sec=Worldupdates
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070227074949/http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/793999.html to http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/793999.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:47, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hezbollah’s Al-Manar TV has recently released extended video footage of the capture of Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev. Moonswimmer Mooonswimmer 13:16, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Footage released 

message: Source 6 is used to claim that the UN has confirmed Shebaa Farms as Lebanese. However, the source sits behind a registration wall and the only other contemporaneous article  specifying something similar that I can find is from the same website. That author later seems to counter this narrative in Sept of the same year.
It should be noted that Haaretz, though Israeli, is considered broadly 'anti-settlement' which may influence its representation of the facts in this case.
An alternative contemporaneous article (Reuters) suggests the UN cartogrophers were defining the area in 2007; this is distinct from defining who owns it.
Given that multiple articles in 2013/14 and 2023/24 seem to make no mention of a UN statement on the matter (and I've found no such UN statement), it may be better to rephrase this paragraph to be more in line with other Wikipedia pages on the subject (Shebaa Farms) which express the unresolved contested claims on the area. Recognize All (talk) 21:25, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source 6 (Haaretz)