Should we start getting worried?

[Echo]

So now Isreal is bombing Palestine and Lebanon. I guarantee you that Palestine and Lebanon are not going to just sit there and take it up the ass. How long before this escalates to a nuclear war?

[sanjuro]

So now Isreal is bombing Palestine and Lebanon. I guarantee you that Palestine and Lebanon are not going to just sit there and take it up the ass. How long before this escalates to a nuclear war?
same sh*t, different day

[DRB]

So now Isreal is bombing Palestine and Lebanon. I guarantee you that Palestine and Lebanon are not going to just sit there and take it up the ass. How long before this escalates to a nuclear war?

The ultimate in chicken little.

[ALEXIS_DH]

when i heard that on cnn when i woke i thought "the **** has hit the fan".

lately i´ve been realpolitik-mussing about stuff like the geneva conventions and the rules of engagements.. and i´ve had some icky ideas...

i agree with the principle behind them. GC and ROE provide a more humane treatment to those involved in war and, in a way, lower the "necessary" amount of damage and pain and places a powerful incentive NOT to use excesive force. (like not doing 20 years for war crimes).

but i believe sometimes ROE and the GC can cause more destruction and pain, specifically in scenarios for which they were not thought for to begin with.
they can sometimes go against the very same principle they were established for.

ROE for example, provide certain excemptions abused by terrorist groups to inflict damage to "regularly" ROE abiding armies. this can sometimes prolong war for longer than it would have taken IF said groups were not certain their tactics would be indirectly protected by ROE.

taking about the real world, in wars between regular armies and paramilitaries (regardless of who was right)... colombia, peru, vietnam, iraq, israel, etc, etc.....
peru got rid of its commie guerilla after 12 years with the army playing nasty tricks. i agree the tricks were nasty and everything my "liberal" mind can get a grip on... BUT i cannot deny they were effective.

did less people died (and peace was achieved) as a result of that, than it would have been IF ROE and every other rules were followed?
i believe now, after the fact, we can establish less people died.

does that justify them????
if saving lives doesnt justify its use, then "saving lifes" cant justify "the principle of killing less people"????

btw, i dont believe ROE, GC and others should not apply to regular armies fighting between them, nor that every humanitarian rule should be rejected... flame me away....

[dhbuilder]

you'd think that by now all the surrounding countries would know better than to f... with israel.
because they'll bomb the crap outta ya without giving it a second thought.

and they don't care if any of us like it or not.

[LordOpie]

you'd think that by now all the surrounding countries would know better than to f... with israel.
because they'll bomb the crap outta ya without giving it a second thought.

and they don't care if any of us like it or not.
Why do abused women return to their man?

[ALEXIS_DH]

Why do abused women return to their man?

because they have big wangs?

[noname]

waiting for a big dust cloud to form over the middle east.

[Serial Midget]

Anyone else think its time to stop giving Isreal money and let natural selection take its course?

[BurlyShirley]

Anyone else think its time to stop giving Isreal money and let natural selection take its course?
Nope.

[LordOpie]

because they have big wangs?
No, because they have low self-esteem, just like suicide bombers... because the Koran forbids breastfeeding.

[bjanga]

Maybe after this ends, enough people will be dead that things will be quiet for a while.

[blue]

Israel and the Islamists need to fvcking die.

[rockwool]

when i heard that on cnn when i woke i thought "the **** has hit the fan".

lately i´ve been realpolitik-mussing about stuff like the geneva conventions and the rules of engagements.. and i´ve had some icky ideas...

i agree with the principle behind them. GC and ROE provide a more humane treatment to those involved in war and, in a way, lower the "necessary" amount of damage and pain and places a powerful incentive NOT to use excesive force. (like not doing 20 years for war crimes).

but i believe sometimes ROE and the GC can cause more destruction and pain, specifically in scenarios for which they were not thought for to begin with.
they can sometimes go against the very same principle they were established for.

ROE for example, provide certain excemptions abused by terrorist groups to inflict damage to "regularly" ROE abiding armies. this can sometimes prolong war for longer than it would have taken IF said groups were not certain their tactics would be indirectly protected by ROE.

taking about the real world, in wars between regular armies and paramilitaries (regardless of who was right)... colombia, peru, vietnam, iraq, israel, etc, etc.....
peru got rid of its commie guerilla after 12 years with the army playing nasty tricks. i agree the tricks were nasty and everything my "liberal" mind can get a grip on... BUT i cannot deny they were effective.

did less people died (and peace was achieved) as a result of that, than it would have been IF ROE and every other rules were followed?
i believe now, after the fact, we can establish less people died.

does that justify them????
if saving lives doesnt justify its use, then "saving lifes" cant justify "the principle of killing less people"????

btw, i dont believe ROE, GC and others should not apply to regular armies fighting between them, nor that every humanitarian rule should be rejected... flame me away....

Do I understand yoiu correctly that you think GC and ROE shouldn't be applied when a rerular army is fighting a guerilla?

[rockwool]

So now Isreal is bombing Palestine and Lebanon. I guarantee you that Palestine and Lebanon are not going to just sit there and take it up the ass. How long before this escalates to a nuclear war?

NO. Israel is so strong with their conventional weapons they don't need to use their a-bomb.

[fluff]

Bear in mind that so far (according to figures from the BBC):

Hezbollah has killed 8 Israeli soldiers and captured 2, and killed 1 Israeli civilian

The Israeli army has killed an unknown no of Hezbollah guerillas and 27 Lebanese civilians (of which 10 were children).

Hezbollah suck btw.

[ALEXIS_DH]

Do I understand yoiu correctly that you think GC and ROE shouldn't be applied when a rerular army is fighting a guerilla?


as eerie and hair rising as it may sound, yes.

i dont believe regular armies should be bound by ROE when facing established guerillas.
GC, not every one of them.
:hot:

[rockwool]

Bear in mind that so far (according to figures from the BBC):

Hezbollah has killed 8 Israeli soldiers and captured 2, and killed 1 Israeli civilian

The Israeli army has killed an unknown no of Hezbollah guerillas and 27 Lebanese civilians (of which 10 were children).

Hezbollah suck btw.

Seems like the Israelis got the lead in this match aswell..

I don't think Hizbollah suck. They are a product of their enviroment and a guerilla movement.
The western world lable them as terrorists but that is a butcher labeling the meat. If this was the 1770's the Brittish would have labled the American freedom movement as terrorists.

[ALEXIS_DH]

Seems like the Israelis got the lead in this match aswell..

I don't think Hizbollah suck. They are a product of their enviroment and a guerilla movement.
The western world lable them as terrorists but that is a butcher labeling the meat. If this was the 1770's the Brittish would have labled the American freedom movement as terrorists.

i see the lack of guerrillas and general peacefulness in scandinavia creates funny ideals......

[rockwool]

as eerie and hair rising as it may sound, yes.

i dont believe regular armies should be bound by ROE when facing established guerillas.
GC, not every one of them.
:hot:

But then they wouldn't have to follow the law?!!
Recently the US supreme court ruled that special courts for "terrorists" were illegal. Now even in that crazy country there is some powerful people that say that even the mighty military have to abide by the same rules that every body else has too.

[ALEXIS_DH]

But then they wouldn't have to follow the law?!!
Recently the US supreme court ruled that special courts for "terrorists" were illegal. Now even in that crazy country there is some powerful people that say that even the mighty military have to abide by the same rules that every body else has too.

am not saying they should all be discarted..

but i believe a new set is required. plus the whole idea of "special courts" isnt that crazy... military personnel are already judged on "special courts" too....

[rockwool]

i see the lack of guerrillas and general peacefulness in scandinavia creates funny ideals......

There's nothing radical in that conclusion. It's proven through history that opponants of the ruling power have been labled with words similar to "terrorist".

[fluff]

Seems like the Israelis got the lead in this match aswell..

I don't think Hizbollah suck. They are a product of their enviroment and a guerilla movement.
The western world lable them as terrorists but that is a butcher labeling the meat. If this was the 1770's the Brittish would have labled the American freedom movement as terrorists.
Whilst I can understand that "today's terrorists are tomorrow's freedom fighters" I find it hard to justify attacks upon civilians. If Hezbollah were to restrict their actions to only military targets (and I would even concede diplomatic at a stretch) then you might have a point.

However, Hezbollah is also believed by the United States to have kidnapped and tortured to death U.S. Marine Colonel William R. Higgins and the CIA Station Chief in Beirut, William Buckley, and to have kidnapped around 30 other Westerners between 1982 and 1992, including the American journalist Terry Anderson, British journalist John McCarthy, the Archbishop of Canterbury's special envoy Terry Waite and Irish citizen Brian Keenan. (Source wikipaedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah) but it is generally held to be true.)

[rockwool]

am not saying they should all be discarted..

but i believe a new set is required. plus the whole idea of "special courts" isnt that crazy... military personnel are already judged on "special courts" too....

It's hippocritical!
There is no difference to a guerilla than to a regular army just because they don't wave another coloured flag than the ones they are fighting.
The type of warfare that they do does not rule them out as any different eather. The whole swedish army is buillt up in smaller guerilla units and the main battle form they use is guerilla ambushing.
To win a war/battle you have to master tactics just like in a game of football; different offensive/defensive combinations.

[rockwool]

Whilst I can understand that "today's terrorists are tomorrow's freedom fighters" I find it hard to justify attacks upon civilians. If Hezbollah were to restrict their actions to only military targets (and I would even concede diplomatic at a stretch) then you might have a point.

However, Hezbollah is also believed by the United States to have kidnapped and tortured to death U.S. Marine Colonel William R. Higgins and the CIA Station Chief in Beirut, William Buckley, and to have kidnapped around 30 other Westerners between 1982 and 1992, including the American journalist Terry Anderson, British journalist John McCarthy, the Archbishop of Canterbury's special envoy Terry Waite and Irish citizen Brian Keenan. (Source wikipaedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah) but it is generally held to be true.)

Yes there is no justification to attacking civilians. But if you occupy another country its bound to happen. We should also remember all the mental **** people in a warzone go through (which is to abstract to understand for us who haven't lived it).
Israeli civilians dying is a REACTION not an ACTION to the occupations of Palestine!
US military in Lebanon? What were they doing there anyways, protecting the 53'd state?

[ALEXIS_DH]

It's hippocritical!
There is no difference to a guerilla than to a regular army just because they don't wave another coloured flag than the ones they are fighting.
The type of warfare that they do does not rule them out as any different eather. The whole swidish army is buillt up in smaller guerilla units and the main battle form they use is guerilla ambushing.
To win a war/battle you have to master tactics just like in a game of football; different offensive/defensive combinations.

no its not.
in a regular army there is a somewhat established chain of command, where there if a face for accountability and so on.

in a guerilla you are bound to get the "wasn´t me" card a lot. that makes for more "innecesary" damage in the long term.
and dont tell me "guerrillas" are effective tactics to "win". for the most part, they just prolong the defeat of whoever resorts to them, killing more people in the meanwhile.

[fluff]

Yes there is no justification to attacking civilians. But if you occupy another country its bound to happen. We should also remember all the mental **** people in a warzone go through (which is to abstract to understand for us who haven't lived it).
Israeli civilians dying is a REACTION not an ACTION to the occupations of Palestine!
US military in Lebanon? What were they doing there anyways, protecting the 53'd state?
Did you justify the torture and the kidnappings?

It is important to separate right from wrong regardless of the situation. Even during the occupation of Lebanon by Israeli forces if Hezbollah employ such tactics as kidnapping & killing the citizens of other nations (and hence non-combatants in any sense) then they are clearly utilising terrorist tactics. That makes them terrorists.

None of which justifies, or is justified by, any other questionable actions by any other parties.

[Changleen]

Fluff you're being a bit ghey mate. C'mon.

[fluff]

Fluff you're being a bit ghey mate. C'mon.
Why do you think that?

[dhbuilder]

Anyone else think its time to stop giving Isreal money and let natural selection take its course?

the first half of that statement just might be the taproot of all of the u.s.a.'s middle east problems.

[JerseyDave]

I think we should take away their nukes....then stop sending them aid.

[spincrazy]

the first half of that statement just might be the taproot of all of the u.s.a.'s middle east problems.

A effing men

This is not good for the US, not good for anyone. effing religions.

[Sir Happypants]

There's nothing radical in that conclusion. It's proven through history that opponants of the ruling power have been labled with words similar to "terrorist".

except theres a huge difference between shooting at army regulars and blowing up a car in a crowded city street full of civillians

[dirtydirtysouf]

So now Isreal is bombing Palestine and Lebanon. I guarantee you that Palestine and Lebanon are not going to just sit there and take it up the ass. How long before this escalates to a nuclear war?

i give it a week till we are in the middle of that **** storm

[Secret Squirrel]

It's hippocritical!
There is no difference to a guerilla than to a regular army just because they don't wave another coloured flag than the ones they are fighting.
The type of warfare that they do does not rule them out as any different eather. The whole swidish army is buillt up in smaller guerilla units and the main battle form they use is guerilla ambushing.
To win a war/battle you have to master tactics just like in a game of football; different offensive/defensive combinations.
So if Norway got its' collective panties in a bunch and started ambushing your guerilla units, that would be just like an occupying force, using proper ROE's and following the GC, getting picked off??......wow....just wow....

[fluff]

There is one huge difference!

Is the Israelis don't attack the Palistinians unless provoked.

The arabs on the other hand are continually attacking Israel with terrorism and with conventional weapons.

Why should the world condem Israel for defending against her attackers?
Well, the Israelis are occupying the Palestinians & Syrians/Lebanese territory so you could argue that the occupation is an act of aggression.

[fluff]

there never was a 'palestinian' state... and the other 3 countries lost their territory after attacking Israel in the 1960's and lost.
What "other 3 countries" are you referring to exactly?

[dhbuilder]

There is one huge difference!

Is the Israelis don't attack the Palistinians unless provoked.

The arabs on the other hand are continually attacking Israel with terrorism and with conventional weapons.

Why should the world condem Israel for defending against her attackers?

i personally don't condem them for bombin the everlovin daylights out of whoever messes with them.
but they've been a major aggravation to the region ever since they were set up there at the end of WWII.
they're surrounded by pure hate and evil. and are a focal point of that hate.
and we're hated because of our support for them. but we can hang them out to dry.

nothing over there makes sense.
the term political tightrope doesn't even come close.

[SDH]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War#Main_reasons_for_the_war

[Secret Squirrel]

i personally don't condem them for bombin the everlovin daylights out of whoever messes with them.
but they've been a major aggravation to the region ever since they were set up there at the end of WWII.
they're surrounded by pure hate and evil. and are a focal point of that hate.
and we're hated because of our support for them. but we can hang them out to dry.

nothing over there makes sense.
the term political tightrope doesn't even come close.
Political Dental Floss would be more apt....

On the other hand, I really don't want to see any of the Lebanese government chica's in anything resembling a bikini...

[rockwool]

no its not.
in a regular army there is a somewhat established chain of command, where there if a face for accountability and so on.

in a guerilla you are bound to get the "wasn´t me" card a lot. that makes for more "innecesary" damage in the long term.
and dont tell me "guerrillas" are effective tactics to "win". for the most part, they just prolong the defeat of whoever resorts to them, killing more people in the meanwhile.

In theory maybe, but that don't work out all to well in reallity. Look at all the junta's in latin america where they've been given immunity and God knows what not.
Same thing with Greece after IIWW where the ones who were collaborating with the nazi's side just changed masters to the brittish when zie germans retireted. Churchill ordered in 1945 brittish paratroopers and greek ex nazis to shoot in at a civillian crowd demonstrating against the brittish neo colonization of Greece. A major scandal world wide but no one was blamed or trialed.

Guerilla tactics are super effective, the nazis only controled the cities in the balkans, outside it was partizan teritory. Brought the whole Italin invading force to capitulate, including the Pinerollo Commando Division.
Standing up for your rights will cost you and others something. Accepting another invading force or the injust systems that rule in some countries will cost a lot too. You don't live just because you breath, there are abstract things that make life worth living that are more important.

[rockwool]

Did you justify the torture and the kidnappings?

It is important to separate right from wrong regardless of the situation. Even during the occupation of Lebanon by Israeli forces if Hezbollah employ such tactics as kidnapping & killing the citizens of other nations (and hence non-combatants in any sense) then they are clearly utilising terrorist tactics. That makes them terrorists.

None of which justifies, or is justified by, any other questionable actions by any other parties.

Yes, wrong is always wrong but there is big nono's and small nono's. Occupation is terrorism, just in a much bigger scale. You have to worry about the moscitos later when you have a Tyranosaurus Rex on you ass...

[rockwool]

except theres a huge difference between shooting at army regulars and blowing up a car in a crowded city street full of civillians

Blowing up (israeli) civillians in busses just show how desperate and how unjust the cituation is for the palestinians.
I bet they would love to have exactly the same weapons that the isrealis have; F-16's, gunships, tanks, the logistics and intelligence to run it all. But they don't.

If someone invaded your country what would you do? Continue the game on your playstation or grab that hayfork you keep in your garage and go out and do your part, even though you know, if caught, you're gonna be trialed as a terrorist for not wearing a uniform?

[rockwool]

So if Norway got its' collective panties in a bunch and started ambushing your guerilla units, that would be just like an occupying force, using proper ROE's and following the GC, getting picked off??......wow....just wow....

Dunno what you mean by this. Can you say it in another way?

[rockwool]

there never was a 'palestinian' state... and the other 3 countries lost their territory after attacking Israel in the 1960's and lost.

Sure there is. The Gaza strip, the West Bank and Eastern Jerusalem make out the state of Palestine today.
In 1948 the state of Israel was made by carving out 67% of the most fertile land of Palestine.

Nice sharing... Done by two swedes, both jews... NOt too just, fair and all dat shlt is it?

[LordOpie]

In 1948 the state of Israel was made by carving out 67% of the most fertile land of Palestine.
please read this...

that number is completely false. Israel was carved out of the Ottoman Empire who lost the war to Britain and France. As with all wars, winner gets to decide what happens. Combine Israel and Jordan and that's most of the land occupied by the Ottomans.

Look at a map and see how much land was given to Jordan versus Israel.

Also consider that France and UK gave away land! I'm not sure they've ever done that before. They usually KEEP it.

So, before you hate Israel for a situation they didn't make, consider the bigger picture... like there wasn't a Palestine, like Jordan and the rest of the Arab World forced some and encouraged other Islamic-Arabs (as opposed to Jewish-Arabs) to stay and be a thorn in Isreal's side.

Thank you for reading.

[Silver]

What are these asshats fighting over again? I'm sure it was worth if for the Israeli woman who got vaporized while sipping coffee on her balcony, or the Lebanese family who had like 12 people dead.

I saw Bush trying to talk tough to Syria on teevee...I wonder if Toshi would be willing to guess what they have him on. He seemed more dopey than usual, and he didn't snicker once.

[DRB]

Standing up for your rights will cost you and others something. Accepting another invading force or the injust systems that rule in some countries will cost a lot too. You don't live just because you breath, there are abstract things that make life worth living that are more important.

Fine but you live with the consequences of your actions. And in this case the consequences are the fury of the IDF on your doorstep.

[Changleen]

Why do you think that?Sorry I'd had 12 shots of vodka when I posted that, don't know what the fvck I was thinking to be honest. I was quite suprised to see I'd already posted in this thread.

[ALEXIS_DH]

ahmadinejad has said if israel touches syria it would be an attack on the "whole islamic world" a "fierce response" will come...

:eek:

[Secret Squirrel]

oh man... that sounds scarey.... NOT!!!

:p
Unfortunately, Syria is no longer in 1967 .....it won't end in 6 days in favor of the Israelites.....

[Mackie]

So now Isreal is bombing Palestine and Lebanon. I guarantee you that Palestine and Lebanon are not going to just sit there and take it up the ass. How long before this escalates to a nuclear war?

"Someday a real rain will come and wash all this scum off the streets".

Yeah, they are heading for something big. The least compasionate part of me hopes for something huge, some nuclear reset button that wipes the slate clean and makes everyone so ready to kill one another over there realize just how crazy the whole thing is.

Religion as a political agenda scares the crap out of me.

[ALEXIS_DH]

"Someday a real rain will come and wash all this scum off the streets".



love that movie.
reputation for the quote. 10 points for style and execution.

[ALEXIS_DH]

oh man... that sounds scarey.... NOT!!!

:p

well, if iran gets tangled, that **** would really hit the fan....

the US is in the iraq quagmire, virtually no public support for bush to drag into another war so easily... so it would probably be israel on its own for a while...

[formermtboarder]

Hezbollah has killed 8 Israeli soldiers and captured 2, and killed 1 Israeli civilian

My girlfriend is in Israel right now, she was an hour from where that happened. 7 Israeli soldiers dead, 2 captured, 3 civilians killed.

Im trying to convince her to come home. Im very worried this will escalate, do you all think it will?

[noname]

there's no thinking about it.

[formermtboarder]

there's no thinking about it.
??????

[fluff]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War#Main_reasons_for_the_war
Appropos of?

[fluff]

there never was a 'palestinian' state... and the other 3 countries lost their territory after attacking Israel in the 1960's and lost.
Who said anything about a state? The territory occupied by Israel has not been a state for a long time according to that criteria, and Israel is only one by dint of superior military force.

And when exactly did The Lebanon attack Israel in the 1960s?

Nice one-liners N8, but a little short on substance.

[fluff]

Sorry I'd had 12 shots of vodka when I posted that, don't know what the fvck I was thinking to be honest. I was quite suprised to see I'd already posted in this thread.
:thumb: Ah, the wonders of alcohol.

[ALEXIS_DH]

Who said anything about a state? The territory occupied by Israel has not been a state for a long time according to that criteria, and Israel is only one by dint of superior military force.

And when exactly did The Lebanon attack Israel in the 1960s?

Nice one-liners N8, but a little short on substance.

well, there were 3 countries at least., egypt, jordan and iraq.

if am not mistaken iraq had a military alliance with egypt´s nasser....

[ALEXIS_DH]

Not Iran... its Syria. And Syria controlled a large part of Lebanon and has only pulled their military out of there last year.

See the 6 Days War: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War

duh!

i was trying so hard to make a connection with a "3rd" country besides the obvious, only thing i remembered was the iraq-egypt alliance, yet, somehow i completely missed the actual 3rd, syria, with golan and the sheba farms...

[BuddhaRoadkill]

love that movie.
reputation for the quote. 10 points for style and execution.
Agreed! :thumb:

[fluff]

well, there were 3 countries at least., egypt, jordan and iraq.

if am not mistaken iraq had a military alliance with egypt´s nasser....
But none of them were the Lebanon. You know, the country that Israel is shelling? The one they invaded? The one that has not invaded Israel.

I was trying to ascertain the relevance of N8's remark to this current scenario, beyond the usual smokescreen tactic of course.

[DRB]

But none of them were the Lebanon. You know, the country that Israel is shelling? The one they invaded? The one that has not invaded Israel.

I was trying to ascertain the relevance of N8's remark to this current scenario, beyond the usual smokescreen tactic of course.

Where are the shells and rockets coming from? Where did the "freedom fighters" that captured the two IDF soldiers come from and where did they return?

[DRB]

Unfortunately, Syria is no longer in 1967 .....it won't end in 6 days in favor of the Israelites.....

Neither is Israel.

[ALEXIS_DH]

But none of them were the Lebanon. You know, the country that Israel is shelling? The one they invaded? The one that has not invaded Israel.

I was trying to ascertain the relevance of N8's remark to this current scenario, beyond the usual smokescreen tactic of course.

hezbollah has pretty much a carte blanche in lebanon.
it holds 2 ministerial seat, and about 20% of the congress...

its definately not an irrelevant actor in the lebanese scene...

[fluff]

Syrian/Iranian backed terror group, Hezbollah, occupies a good chunk of southern Lebanon.. they launched 150 rockets into Israel, broke thru the border and captured 2 of Israel's soldiers... not Israel is attacking their headquarters and strongholds.

So what...
What, you mean broke thru the "border" into Syrian territory occupied by Israel?

[fluff]

Where are the shells and rockets coming from? Where did the "freedom fighters" that captured the two IDF soldiers come from and where did they return?
I don't believe it was Beirut. Which is being shelled by Israel. But considering we were talking about the relevance of the Six Day War to Lebanon is completely irrelevant.

[fluff]

hezbollah has pretty much a carte blanche in lebanon.
it holds 2 ministerial seat, and about 20% of the congress...

its definately not an irrelevant actor in the lebanese scene...
Agreed. But again, that is not the Six Day War, which is what N8 was referring to.

[fluff]

Most of the blame for the current situation falls squarely on the shoulders of Syria and Jordan. These countries kept the Palistinians as refugees.. foring them to live in camps and not allowing them into their populations. Consider it Arabian 'brotherly love'...

Jus think how vastly better off the Palistinians would be today if they had gone along with the Israelies and assimulated into their society. Israel is the economic power house and has one of the higher standard of living in that region... not to mention it is a hell of a lot more democratic than the arab kingdoms which surround it.
Well, isn't that a question you should address to the Palestinians? Perhaps you could even research the reasons for the mass exodus of Arabs from Palestine (sorry, the bit of the middle east now called Israel)? It's called Ethnic Cleansing in modern day terms.

[fluff]

Sure.. if that makes you feel better, changleen...



:p
Oh boy, you got me there... At least you didn't call me N8.

Actually I do enjoy reality more than your little fantasy world.

Edit: Seriously N8. I'd like to know, what is your problem with that post?

Here's a picture for you:
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41877000/gif/_41877150_israel_golanheights_map203.gif

[valve bouncer]

I can certainly understand Israel going after Hezbollah in Southern Lebanon but bombing Beirut Airport? That smacks of bastardry to me. According to the Bush doctrine stable, prosperous democracies are the key to defeating terrorism but here you have Israel attacking Lebanese infrastructure which will certainly set back Lebanon economically. At the very least the tourist industry is in the toilet for the foreseeable future.

[valve bouncer]

I imagine it's to stop the soldiers being taken out of the country, the same reason they're bombing roads and bridges all over the country, disrupt transport links.

[fluff]

...and... Israel captured the Golan Hts, because....????
Because it's a strategic area Einstein. Regardless of why even you should be able to comprehend the symmetry of your logic; it is OK for the Israelis to fight people who threaten them, enter their territory and try to occupy it, so it should also be OK for others to attack Israel if they enter their territory and try to occupy it. That Israel is more powerful and effective is beside the point. By your own logic they are reaping what they have sown.

Oh, and if you have any doubt on my opinion of Hezbollah feel free to review the thread. And so far as I am concerned any organisation that targets civilians (even if they term it collateral damage) is in no position to claim any moral high ground.

Still, I guess a leaflet drop does it for you eh?

[fluff]

It's too late for the Palestinians now... their political leaders have chosen their fate for them... and it is continual violence.

They had numerous chances to live in peace with Israel and it is something they and their Jordian/Syrian/Iranian/Saudi masters don't want. A stable Palestinian/Israelie relationship doesn't play well with them at all.
As with your other arguments this also can be turned on its head; Israel's leaders have chosen continual violence also as they too have had chances to live in peace with the Arabs. If you remember Jerusalem was the sticking point, it takes two to make peace.

[fluff]

No, it is not the same thing. Syria used the Golan Hts to shell and launch attacks into Israel. So, when Syria attacked thru there in the 60's, Israel beat their ass and took the area like any smart country would do. It isn't like Israel uses the Golan to launch unprevoked attacks and shelling into Syria which is what Syria was doing repeatedly for nearly 2 decades prior to losing it.

I know you aren't that thick...
From the Syrian perspective the Golan Heights ARE Syria... ergo the mere presence of Israeli troops is an attack.

Would you expect Israel to allow any Arab nation to occupy part of Israel? If not then why should you expect Syria to do the same. Stop thinking about which country you like more and look at it dispassionately, otherwise your perception is skewed.

Oh, and thanks for the endorsement but I already know how thick I am and we aren't approaching it yet.

[fluff]

Wrong again... Israel has made numerous attempts to bring peace to their country... even pulling out of Gaza and more.
Wrong again about what exactly N8?

[BurlyShirley]

The country with the bigger guns usually gets what it wants. Just sit back and relax...

[fluff]

Sure the Syrians consider that Golan their territory... but when they used it as an avenue to shell and to invade the Baaka Valley, they lost it to Israel in the ensuing wars that THEY started.

Boo-hoo...

:p
Why don't you just say you prefer Israel to Syria, it's a lot more honest than all the other rubbish you try and pass over as reasoning and probably an easier postion to defend. Otherwise you are trying to justify actions in one direction and decry them in the reverse.

[fluff]

Humm.. I don't recall Israel vowing to wipe Syria/Jordan/Iran off the map like their Syrian/Jordanian/Iranian/Palistinian neighbors have...

Irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

If you are suggesting Israel is on equal footing with that crowd, you are denser than I would have given you credit for.

Do you not agree that they share the same rights?


And, yes, I do prefer Israel to Syria et al... At least it's a western friendly country with a democratic government and not a tribal fiefdom.
Your preference is clear.

[DVNT]

back to the topic...should we be worried.

Meanwhile, Israel fears the two kidnapped soldiers may be moved from Lebanon to Iran.

Such a move by the militant Hezbollah could spark a further escalation of tensions and military action in the region.

"We have concerns that they could be taken out of Lebanon to Iran. Those concerns have a basis," said Foreign Ministry spokesman Mark Regev.

Maybe something to think about (http://www.itv.com/news/index_c584717c2a730abb897208eb4b267381.html)

Of course if we get dragged into it, it would fit nicely with Bush's exit strategy (http://www.theonion.com/content/node/30931)for Iraq.

[fluff]

Not wordy enough.... where's your buddy OMGF today..???
Back to dodging the tricky questions I see.

[noname]

this is getting interesting. Don't think I've ever seen N8 engaged in a debate before. Fun.......http://forums.sportbikes.net/forums/images/smilies/eatpop.gif

[Secret Squirrel]

this is getting interesting. Don't think I've ever seen N8 engaged in a debate before. Fun.......http://forums.sportbikes.net/forums/images/smilies/eatpop.gif
Debate....HAHAHAHAHAhahahahaha .....you make squirrel laugh....

[ALEXIS_DH]

Do you not agree that they share the same rights?
.

not all rights are inherent.
some can be raffled if you start a war, some can be lost by the same reason.

war reparation is the name of the game.

[golgiaparatus]

Meh, when was the last time there wasn't a war over there. Big Iz is the only one with nukes. They arent going to use them... they arent THAT stupid.

What I'm worried about is the fact that the opposition seems to be armed with Iranian equipment. How long till Bush uses that as an excuse to do something stupid in the name of God, oil, and the war on terror.

[luelling]

am not saying they should all be discarted..

but i believe a new set is required. plus the whole idea of "special courts" isnt that crazy... military personnel are already judged on "special courts" too....

Its a war pure and simple. Terroists just don't fight conventionally and I don't buy that we should be labeling them enemy combatants when they are in fact POWs. Attacks on civilian populations during times of war is common....look at WWII.

[DaveW]

Meh, when was the last time there wasn't a war over there. Big Iz is the only one with nukes. They arent going to use them... they arent THAT stupid.

What I'm worried about is the fact that the opposition seems to be armed with Iranian equipment. How long till Bush uses that as an excuse to do something stupid in the name of God, oil, and the war on terror.


It's not Iranian.... the Russians have been chucking weaponry to one and all in that region. Nuthing to do with Iran. :clue:


*EDIT* Sorry I take that back. :stosh: suspected rusian/iranian stuff.
surprises me to be honest I would have picked them to be russian via syria?

[Transcend]

Humm.. I don't recall Israel vowing to wipe Syria/Jordan/Iran off the map like their Syrian/Jordanian/Iranian/Palistinian neighbors have...

If you are suggesting Israel is on equal footing with that crowd, you are denser than I would have given you credit for.

And, yes, I do prefer Israel to Syria et al... At least it's a western friendly country with a democratic government and not a tribal fiefdom.

Lebanon has a democratic government. So does Palestine. You just don't like who they elected.

[LordOpie]

They elected govts that support terrorism or are actual terrorists themselves. Hmm, what a surprise that N8 doesn't like a group that advocates destruction.

[blue]

Lebanon has a democratic government. So does Palestine. You just don't like who they elected.

Totally about to quote him on that.

I find this ludicrous "WE <3 DEMOCRACY!" crap coming out Condis/US Gov't mouth to be obscene. The people of Palestine WANTED Hamas in power.

Should we just kill all the Palestinians since we don't like Hamas?

The simple fact is, the current Bush excuse (craptastic as it was) for war in Iraq has been written off by their sanctioning of the Palestinian government. It's really NOT THAT HARD TO SEE THROUGH.

N8, go live in a ****ing rathole.

[Silver]

Should we just kill all the Palestinians since we don't like Hamas?



http://www.jafi.org.il/agenda/9-1c.jpg

He doesn't look pale enough to worry overly about...I'd say we're good to go.

[valve bouncer]

The Lebanese government are in a damned if you do and damned if you don't type situation here. The strength of and support for Hezbollah means any government in Lebanon isn't going to be able to function without their acquiescence. Essentially the Lebanese govt has done a deal with the devil in return for stability and economic growth (remember Lebanon and especially Beirut were starting to return to the glory days of the early 70's). The inability of Hezbollah to rein in its fighters coupled with the Israeli propensity of using a sledgehammer to crack a nut has set back Lebanon perhaps a decade. Where will it all end?

[BurlyShirley]

valve[/B] bouncer]The Lebanese government are in a damned if you do and damned if you don't type situation here. The strength of and support for Hezbollah means any government in Lebanon isn't going to be able to function without their acquiescence. Essentially the Lebanese govt has done a deal with the devil in return for stability and economic growth (remember Lebanon and especially Beirut were starting return to the glory days of the early 70's). The inability of Hezbollah to rein in its fighters coupled with the Israeli propensity of using a sledgehammer to crack a nut has set back Lebanon perhaps a decade. Where will it all balls?
WTF are you talking about?:agree:

[LordOpie]

WTF are you talking about?:agree:
He's a racist.

[DaveW]

He's a racist.


WHAT??? Since when did he become an american?

[rockwool]

please read this...

that number is completely false. Israel was carved out of the Ottoman Empire who lost the war to Britain and France. As with all wars, winner gets to decide what happens. Combine Israel and Jordan and that's most of the land occupied by the Ottomans.

Look at a map and see how much land was given to Jordan versus Israel.

Also consider that France and UK gave away land! I'm not sure they've ever done that before. They usually KEEP it.

So, before you hate Israel for a situation they didn't make, consider the bigger picture... like there wasn't a Palestine, like Jordan and the rest of the Arab World forced some and encouraged other Islamic-Arabs (as opposed to Jewish-Arabs) to stay and be a thorn in Isreal's side.

Thank you for reading.


Be carefull about accusing others for hating. Soon you'll be calling me an anti semite too..
You don't know me and I haven't expressed any hatred to give you a reason to say that.

In this case the UN got to deside what happened and that is the only thing relevant. What different colonial states did, including the Turks, is mostly sad history. How they defined different cultures, their land and languages leave a lot to wish for. Greece has some new neighbours in the north, they are Slavs, but today call them selves Macedonians due to colonial blunders..
But the UN did give two Swedes the assignement to split Palestine and make two states from it. If Israel didn't get spot on 67% of palestine (as I remember it) it was definately around that number.

You don't have to force somebody NOT to leave their home. That is something people stick to just because it is THEIR HOME. Sefardim Jews have lived next to Arabs since the diaspora, in peace! It wasn't until the Haganah started terrorizing them, and blaming it on the Arabs, to get them to move to the not yet founded Israel.
Now, the UN gave the Jews a home of their own which is a thing the Palestinians have to accept. The Jews also belong to that region and the land should be shared with them. But the UN did not allow the ethnic clensing that happened after the 6 day war in 1967. That is a major violation to human rights.

As for present time, what has been decided by the UN must be followed by all parties.
The Jews have a right to live in peace, but for it to happen they must give what they ask for. Having the role of Goliath today they are the ones that have to give the most.
The refugees have a right to return to their homes and becoming citizens of Israel.
The wall of hatred must be torn down or moved to Israeli soil.
The Palestinian enclaves returned to the Palestinians.
Settlements must be shut down.
Golan heights given back to Syria.
The control over the fresh water must be shared equal.
Ports and airports must be allowed to open on Palestinian soil so they can trade and prosper just like any country.

Allowing a "greater Israel" is as wrongfull as zie germans claming gross Deutchland again..

[rockwool]

Where are the shells and rockets coming from? Where did the "freedom fighters" that captured the two IDF soldiers come from and where did they return?

Strange that some think people will just sit back and take **** for as long as it's handed to them. We're talking about life in refugee camps for 39 years! Damn right some are gonna try do something, even if its laughable how much damage a few "rockets" can do. I wonder what type it is, anti tank RPG's? Haven't got a reach of more than a couple of km as I understand it.

[rockwool]

It's too late for the Palestinians now... their political leaders have chosen their fate for them... and it is continual violence.

They had numerous chances to live in peace with Israel and it is something they and their Jordian/Syrian/Iranian/Saudi masters don't want. A stable Palestinian/Israelie relationship doesn't play well with them at all.

It's like listening to Goebbles some times..

[rockwool]

No, it is not the same thing. Syria used the Golan Hts to shell and launch attacks into Israel. So, when Syria attacked thru there in the 60's, Israel beat their ass and took the area like any smart country would do. It isn't like Israel uses the Golan to launch unprevoked attacks and shelling into Syria which is what Syria was doing repeatedly for nearly 2 decades prior to losing it.

I know you aren't that thick...

Yes, they did used their golan heights to shell into Israel prior to 1967 but we got to get back to present day. They should be fully returned if guarantied that syria won't do it again.

Wrong again... Israel has made numerous attempts to bring peace to their country... even pulling out of Gaza and more.

So if yo get cought stealing and the man tells you to return what you've stolen, do you tell them they should be satisfied with you returning 20% of the stolen goods?

Yes. that is the Golden Rule...

But hardly civil or democratic is it?

Humm.. I don't recall Israel vowing to wipe Syria/Jordan/Iran off the map like their Syrian/Jordanian/Iranian/Palistinian neighbors have...

If you are suggesting Israel is on equal footing with that crowd, you are denser than I would have given you credit for.

And, yes, I do prefer Israel to Syria et al... At least it's a western friendly country with a democratic government and not a tribal fiefdom.

They've got their own shlt going on; a palestinian diaspora, they even got a name for it (but i've forgotten it..), just as bad but actually happening. A verry non friendly action.

[LordOpie]

If Israel didn't get spot on 67% of palestine (as I remember it) it was definately around that number.
There was no "palestine" it was Trans-Jordan (aka Ottoman territory)... which included all of present day Jordan. Look at a map and tell me how Israel makes up 67% when they're not even any where near as big as Jordan.

[rockwool]

back to the topic...should we be worried.



Maybe something to think about (http://www.itv.com/news/index_c584717c2a730abb897208eb4b267381.html)

Of course if we get dragged into it, it would fit nicely with Bush's exit strategy (http://www.theonion.com/content/node/30931)for Iraq.

This spreading to the rest of the world the next year? No, it doesn't seem like other nations give a fvck.


cut from itv article:
"100 rockets on northern Israel hitting Israel's third largest city, Haifa, according to the Israeli army. Hezbollah has denied firing on the city."

Hizbollah is denying the rocket firing?!! Interesting, is Israel provoking something a la das reichstag fire in 1933?

cut from the onion:
"I'm pleased to announce that the Department of Defense and I have formulated a plan for a speedy withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq," Bush announced Monday morning. "We'll just go through Iran."

Didn't GWB say that there was no end to "the war on terror". A politician that keeps his promise! Quick buy some shares in Haliburton and the rest of the warmongring companies cus a new market is soon to bloom..

[rockwool]

war reparation is the name of the game.

Time for Vietnam to finaly get theirs?

Its a war pure and simple. Terroists just don't fight conventionally and I don't buy that we should be labeling them enemy combatants when they are in fact POWs. Attacks on civilian populations during times of war is common....look at WWII.

Defenetly, example: I know a village in Peloponisus, Greece, where the germans executed 1000 civillians as a revenge for a guerilla attack done close by.

Lebanon has a democratic government. So does Palestine. You just don't like who they elected.

True.

[rockwool]

There was no "palestine" it was Trans-Jordan (aka Ottoman territory)... which included all of present day Jordan. Look at a map and tell me how Israel makes up 67% when they're not even any where near as big as Jordan.

It's a colonial labeling and not the one used by the inhabitants of the specific place and has there for little relevance.

cut from wikipedia:
Initially, both the territory to the East and the West of the Jordan river were the British Mandate of Palestine. "Transjordan" was a word coined as a reference to the part of Palestine "across the Jordan", i.e. on the far (eastern) side of the Jordan River. On the western side of the Jordan River was the remaining 21% of the Palestine Mandate, Palestine which contained many places of historical and religious significance to Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.

And the UN did and does lable it Palestine!

Almost forgot about the most important thing here; the people that actually lived in that area. Moving them just because a new state is drawn (Israel) is ethnic clensing and strictly verboten. Verstehen sie?

[LordOpie]

How can you possibly dismiss the entire Ottoman Empire's holdings as irrelevant?

Who cares where the word "transjordan" comes from... the description/definition is what's important. Just like the fact that the Romans called the land Palestine as a slap in the face of the 'then-Israel' when they invaded.

you need a reference better than wikipedia cuz it's filled with info from people like you.

Until you post a link from a credible site that somehow magically agrees with your assessment that Israel took 67% of the land conquered by Britain and France, I hope everyone here ignores you.

[Changleen]

you need a reference better than wikipedia cuz it's filled with info from people like you.:nono:

Until you post a link from a credible site that somehow magically agrees with your assessment that Israel took 67% of the land conquered by Britain and France, I hope everyone here ignores you.:nono:

[blue]

Loopie, you're missing something here...The Ottoman Empire was run by a Muslim Theocracy (eg, the dominating faith of the Palestinians), not a Jewish Theocracy.

Would you like to live in Saudi Arabia? Would a Muslim like to live in Israel?

Your opinion is so ridiculously biased and slanted it's not even funny.

Rockwool, Hezbollah uses Kayatusha rockets...WW2 Soviet weaponry.

[rockwool]

How can you possibly dismiss the entire Ottoman Empire's holdings as irrelevant?

Who cares where the word "transjordan" comes from... the description/definition is what's important. Just like the fact that the Romans called the land Palestine as a slap in the face of the 'then-Israel' when they invaded.

you need a reference better than wikipedia cuz it's filled with info from people like you.

Until you post a link from a credible site that somehow magically agrees with your assessment that Israel took 67% of the land conquered by Britain and France, I hope everyone here ignores you.


C'mon, that's not what I said. I know from Greece which was under Ottoman rule for 400years that they had different names to what had been for litteraly thousands of years!
Now how come my mothers village who in greek is called Gefyra in turkish is Topsin?!! The capital of Macedonia is called Thessaloniki but in turkish Solon?!!
The fact that the Former Yugoslavian Republic of Macedonia F.Y.R.O.M. is today by the world called Macedonia (not with the aproval of Greece) is due to the Turks (Ottomans) not caring enough about facts/history when they drew their maps, and when they labeld the slavic dialect, that the "South Serbians" spoke, Macedonian. A brittish linguist picked it up later and after the IIWW Tito had expansionist thoughts and wanted a port in the mediteranian, so he renamed South Serbia to Macedonia, that's how the story goes...
The fact that the slavs didn't come to that region until 500-700 A.D. and that Macedonians were Helenists (Greeks) that had lived there for thousands of years was something the turks totally missed.
That is a perfect example why you shouldn't get hung up over what different colonial powers have labeled their conquests.
They also used the tactic "devide and conquer" and there for also had a reason to intentionally rebadge different land.
What the people living in that specific area calles them selves is the most important thing.

Dunno why and what the romans called the holy land but it is 2006 now and both Jews and Palestinians have the right to live there.

I will try and find you the names of them two mapdrawers and the map they drew.

[DaveW]

Who cares where the word "transjordan" comes from... the description/definition is what's important.


You seemed to care about the areas previous name a few posts earlier??
As rock wool pointed out it was known (post ottoman empire) as the palestine mandate. the trans jordan you were going on about earlier is no more than a colloquial name.

Just like the fact that the Romans called the land Palestine as a slap in the face of the 'then-Israel' when they invaded.

Yes and prior to the israelite invasion it was known by another name.

You need a reference better than wikipedia cuz it's filled with info from people like you.


who use facts rather more often than the hysteria you seem to be displaying today????

Until you post a link from a credible site that somehow magically agrees with your assessment that Israel took 67% of the land conquered by Britain and France, I hope everyone here ignores you.

So far he has posted up far more verifyable links and information than you... Hmm which fella to ignore...........

Get a grip!

[ukjason]

87991

Navy ships head for Lebanon
11.47PM, Sat Jul 15 2006


Britain is sending two Royal Navy ships to the Middle East amid contingency planning for a possible evacuation of British nationals from Lebanon.

The Ministry of Defence said the aircraft carrier HMS Illustrious and the assault ship HMS Bulwark were being sent to the region as the conflict escalates.

But a ministry spokeswoman stressed: "They have been given no specific tasking and this is simply a prudent part of our contingency planning."

HMS Illustrious is currently in Gibraltar and HMS Bulwark is close to Barcelona in Spain.

"There are approximately 3,500 to 4,000 British families registered in Lebanon. There are also 10,000 dual nationals," a Foreign Office spokesman said.

"We are advising people to stay put but to get ready for departure at short notice if necessary. We are in regular contact with our European Union partners," he added.


Would of thought the states will be doing the same thing.

[Silver]

Question for anyone who might know: I've seen a minor deal made out of the fact that Saudi Arabia has criticized Hezbollah. Does anyone know if that might be a legitimate diplomatic position, or just a way for Sunnis to put one over on the Shias?

[DaveW]

Question for anyone who might know: I've seen a minor deal made out of the fact that Saudi Arabia has criticized Hezbollah. Does anyone know if that might be a legitimate diplomatic position, or just a way for Sunnis to put one over on the Shias?


Dunno but the house of Saud is not really representitive of the public opinion in Saudi Arabia. :(

[MikeD]

Dunno but the house of Saud is not really representitive of the public opinion in Saudi Arabia. :(

Yeah, the population of Saudi Arabia would be more direct...say, by suggesting the Shia should all be gassed.


Rockwool, Hezbollah uses Kayatusha rockets...WW2 Soviet weaponry.

Yet their old Katyushas are being replaced with ever-more-modern versions.

You need truckloads of these things to saturate an area; it's rocket-propelled artillery designed to work against area targets, not pinpoint anything specific.

In any case, it's far from an RPG. It's not militarily effective as employed by Hizbullah, but it's sufficient to provoke the desired Israeli response.

To expand..the tactics used by Hizbullah and Hamas are effective in ending occupation of one's home by any imperial force. But they're not going to destroy another country. I know that they see Israel as basically a foreign occupier of Palestine, but it's a sovereign state now, de facto if not in the Muslim mind, and it can't be toppled by terrorist or guerilla action from outside its borders.

Alas, the guerillas and their supporting governments don't want peace; they want Israel destroyed, but they will never be able to do it. So Israel's stuck having to try and use its conventional forces and covert actors to convince them that peace is necessary by use of overwhelming and seemingly disproportionate violence.

It's a grotesque homeostasis. The muslim extremists will use ineffective but dramatic and bloody tactics to attack Israel, and the Israeli government must respond to these incidents with a force tailored not to the actual violence, but to its populace's emotions. And neither side will ever look at the other for what it's doing at the moment, but will respond to the collective emotions which have built up since the beginning of all this just after WWII.

Best thing I think could happen in the current state of affairs is that Israel solves the Lebanese government's "problem" with Hizbullah by simply killing every single one of its armed wing and its political leadership, then withdraws inside its own borders again.

The only 'lesson' that Israel gets taught, time and again, is that no matter what they do, whether they fight or sue for peace, an actor claiming to be stateless (although now they're part of neighboring governments..talk about having your cake and eating it too...) will attack them to provoke a seemingly disproportionate reaction and keep the Arab body count high. You can't have an ongoing war to try and destroy Israel unless you can keep Israel looking evil. And Israel jumps right into the role whenever it's given the chance.

MD

[blue]

Do the Arab states in the area have the combined might to crush Israel from all sides? I know they've tried before and kinda gotten smacked down.

Granted, the Western World would, at some point, intervene...but I'm just curious.

[MikeD]

My money says no way.

[DaveW]

My money says no way.


Same.

But it would be very very messy.

[blue]

Riddle me this, riddle me that...

Would the world as a whole be better off if Israel were crushed w/o nuclear consequences? You know, the Arab states invade, Israel loses, all the Israelis leave on boats...trying to keep it as PG as possible...

Discuss.

[valve bouncer]

Things were looking crook for Israel for a while there back in 1973. Nowadays the US or NATO will almost certainly intervene if the existence of Israel is threatened.

[DaveW]

Israel has a legitimate right to exist as to the surounding states.... but Israel does not have a right to do whatever it pleases. But has turned it's moral high ground into a fetid below mean sea level swamp.
Certainly it's behavior appears to be in breach of the Geneva convention/accord on an all too frequent basis. :(

[Changleen]

Do the Arab states in the area have the combined might to crush Israel from all sides? I know they've tried before and kinda gotten smacked down.No way. They would be own3d once more, probably even harder. In fact almost definately way harder.

[Changleen]

Riddle me this, riddle me that...

Would the world as a whole be better off if Israel were crushed w/o nuclear consequences? You know, the Arab states invade, Israel loses, all the Israelis leave on boats...trying to keep it as PG as possible...

Discuss.It would have been better if the people who conceived of it in the first place post WW2 had realised what a dumb idea it was.

Obviously, if either side could 'lose' with minimal damage and leave the situation cleanly that would appear to be a good thing from most mdium and long term perspectives. Being as Israel is the 'odd one out' that seems to suggest it'd be more logical if they left.

[stevew]

Being as Israel is the 'odd one out' that seems to suggest it'd be more logical if they left.

So it's Arabs only.

Is there a place you would like the Jews sent?

[blue]

So it's Arabs only.

Is there a place you would like the Jews sent?

Where did they all come from in the first place...

"Oh, well Hitler rounded you up to gas you and your relatives, so you can go to this barren inhospitable wasteland instead of having your former homes back..."

So, before 1973, did the Americans not particularly give a **** about Israel? It would make sense...The US doesn't defend Israel on a moral high ground, they do it so they can have an ally and Western power in the MidEast to keep things swinging their way with the oil and such...

[Silver]

It would have been better if the people who conceived of it in the first place post WW2 had realised what a dumb idea it was.

Obviously, if either side could 'lose' with minimal damage and leave the situation cleanly that would appear to be a good thing from most mdium and long term perspectives. Being as Israel is the 'odd one out' that seems to suggest it'd be more logical if they left.

New Mexico would have been good. Right beside a de facto theocracy anyways, and as someone else said here in the past, it would have helped with immigration, because the Israelis know how to build walls...

Having said that, it's not going to happen. And the US is NOT going to be the one to defuse the situation. It's hard to be seen as an honest broker when you're the one arming one side of the conflict.

[Silver]

Israel has a legitimate right to exist as to the surounding states.... but Israel does not have a right to do whatever it pleases. But has turned it's moral high ground into a fetid below mean sea level swamp.
Certainly it's behavior appears to be in breach of the Geneva convention/accord on an all too frequent basis. :(

I saw an IDF spokesman on CNN yesterday. He was very sure that there are no innocent people in Beirut getting hurt, because they shelter Hezbollah. He was mocking the reporter who asked the question. Sounded a lot like an Islamic nut who laughs and says that Jews should all be pushed into the ocean when you ask him if Israel should exist...

I found it odd, because when Rabin was killed, the IDF wasn't firing artillery into Israeli settlements trying to kill Jewish extremists. Were they?

[ALEXIS_DH]

Where did they all come from in the first place...

"Oh, well Hitler rounded you up to gas you and your relatives, so you can go to this barren inhospitable wasteland instead of having your former homes back..."

So, before 1973, did the Americans not particularly give a **** about Israel? It would make sense...The US doesn't defend Israel on a moral high ground, they do it so they can have an ally and Western power in the MidEast to keep things swinging their way with the oil and such...

changleen, the idea of the modern state of israel does NOT date back to post wwii. in fact, there is a explicit mention of it as a proposed goal for the zionist movement as early as the late 1800s.

now, israel is NOT the only country to come up from the balcanization of former EUROPEAN colonies. syria, jordan, lebanon and all those countries in the middle east came to existance thru nationalistic ideas, not so distant in concept from zionism.

there was a non-trivial jewish population in the area (with the self recognition of a people for as long as the arabs if not longer), who have the same right as syria or jordan so existance. and since this indigenous group has a right to self-determination, whoever they deemed to fit help them, or to move in, is totally up to them on any arbitrary ground (like judaism), as with any other state/ethnic group.
and as you see, there is no need to mention god or recur to any non-secular argument.....

so, its not about "the odd one" out based on "they came from abroad" in the simplistic sense, since there are some who are indigenous to the area who have all the right to invite over to their share whoever they want, specially if based on jus sanguinis, and those in turn, have then every right as the indigenous ones based on jus soli....

you could say they are "the odd one" based on the fact they are ethinical minority... but then, it could also be argued on that basis, removing all blacks from the states (even indigenous US born blacks) would be "logical if they left".

[jdcamb]

Best thing I think could happen in the current state of affairs is that Israel solves the Lebanese government's "problem" with Hizbullah by simply killing every single one of its armed wing and its political leadership, then withdraws inside its own borders again.

I think the IDF will lay waste to southern Lebanon. Soon. The more rockets the hezbollah launch. The more Isreal will fall into the role you describe. The Isreali war machine could easily run over their enemies.

[MikeD]

The Isreali war machine could easily run over their enemies.

Whatever enemies it can find...hide your AK47 and you're just another Lebanese citizen. I think Hizbullah, despite the tough talk, knows that 'war' with Israel is impossible...they'll bait Israel in, let it roll through a few insignificant militia skirmishes, and either wear them down guerilla/terrorist-style if they remain to occupy, or go back to flinging rockets over the border when they withdraw.

MD

[rockwool]

Yeah, the population of Saudi Arabia would be more direct...say, by suggesting the Shia should all be gassed.



Yet their old Katyushas are being replaced with ever-more-modern versions.

You need truckloads of these things to saturate an area; it's rocket-propelled artillery designed to work against area targets, not pinpoint anything specific.

In any case, it's far from an RPG. It's not militarily effective as employed by Hizbullah, but it's sufficient to provoke the desired Israeli response.

To expand..the tactics used by Hizbullah and Hamas are effective in ending occupation of one's home by any imperial force. But they're not going to destroy another country. I know that they see Israel as basically a foreign occupier of Palestine, but it's a sovereign state now, de facto if not in the Muslim mind, and it can't be toppled by terrorist or guerilla action from outside its borders.

Alas, the guerillas and their supporting governments don't want peace; they want Israel destroyed, but they will never be able to do it. So Israel's stuck having to try and use its conventional forces and covert actors to convince them that peace is necessary by use of overwhelming and seemingly disproportionate violence.

It's a grotesque homeostasis. The muslim extremists will use ineffective but dramatic and bloody tactics to attack Israel, and the Israeli government must respond to these incidents with a force tailored not to the actual violence, but to its populace's emotions. And neither side will ever look at the other for what it's doing at the moment, but will respond to the collective emotions which have built up since the beginning of all this just after WWII.

Best thing I think could happen in the current state of affairs is that Israel solves the Lebanese government's "problem" with Hizbullah by simply killing every single one of its armed wing and its political leadership, then withdraws inside its own borders again.

The only 'lesson' that Israel gets taught, time and again, is that no matter what they do, whether they fight or sue for peace, an actor claiming to be stateless (although now they're part of neighboring governments..talk about having your cake and eating it too...) will attack them to provoke a seemingly disproportionate reaction and keep the Arab body count high. You can't have an ongoing war to try and destroy Israel unless you can keep Israel looking evil. And Israel jumps right into the role whenever it's given the chance.

MD


The Katyushas are definately a different ballgame to RPG's. Still the respons is way out of proportion. A country needs to be able to functon and trade with other countries or it will lead to more extremism, in this case Hizbollah, from the isolation.

A really worrying bit is that Hizbollah has dismissed that it has fired the 100 rockets. Don't these groups allways take pride in and claim their ****?!!

You propose a lot of killing. But it's the wrong way to go. It wouldn't even work because in a couple of years there will be new guys to fill the dead mens shoes.
If killing is not the sollution, look at its opposite for an answer.

Man, nobody wants to keep their own bodycount high. They've realized that if the powers of the world gave a **** some action from them would have come a long time ago.
There's no differance between us, we all want to live, laugh and grow old.

Do the Arab states in the area have the combined might to crush Israel from all sides? I know they've tried before and kinda gotten smacked down.

Granted, the Western World would, at some point, intervene...but I'm just curious.

No way. And it doesn't seem that any of its neighbours want that (because they've realized they wont make it).

Riddle me this, riddle me that...

Would the world as a whole be better off if Israel were crushed w/o nuclear consequences? You know, the Arab states invade, Israel loses, all the Israelis leave on boats...trying to keep it as PG as possible...

Discuss.

Theoreticly, if there was no Israel it would stabilize the region allot. But as long as US backed and non backed ****ty regimes miss treat its citizens and the sales from their natural resourses goes to private pockets, there will be smoke.
Back to reallity; Jews have a right to live in that area too. A new diaspora is not acceptable.
Not all Jews ar zionists! It was only the zionists that wanted a state of their own. Socialist Jews wanted to share a state with the Palestinians! That sollution would probably fit most people on both "sides".

[MikeD]

The Katyushas are definately a different ballgame to RPG's. Still the respons is way out of proportion. A country needs to be able to functon and trade with other countries or it will lead to more extremism, in this case Hizbollah, from the isolation.

A really worrying bit is that Hizbollah has dismissed that it has fired the 100 rockets. Don't these groups allways take pride in and claim their ****?!! Not always. They talk out of both sides of their mouths, and nothing is absoute...no different than anyone else, really. You propose a lot of killing. But it's the wrong way to go. It wouldn't even work because in a couple of years there will be new guys to fill the dead mens shoes.
If killing is not the sollution, look at its opposite for an answer. No, sometimes killing does solve things, and sometimes permanently. It's not an inherently invalid way to deal with some problems. And sometimes compromise just leaves two dissatisfied parties who will start to fight when the memory of pain fades just a bit.

That said, you'll see in one of my later posts that I don't think it's possible to actually accomplish the destruction of Hizbullah through military means, however desirable it may be. And you're right that sometimes killing certainly ISN'T the answer, or the best or most permanent. Everything's case-by-case...but to reject violence as an option or a reality is folly.Man, nobody wants to keep their own bodycount high. That's precisely what the Muslim extremists want, actually. The Jewish extremist settlers have finally been (mostly) overcome within Israel by its moderates in the name of a peaceful future...or an attempt at it, at least. (Note: this doesn't make Israel a bunch of angels, nor does it make amends for past atrocities, but it's practically the best they can do now.) The Israelis defied the extreme elements within their society and began withdrawals from contested territories, which was amenable to all. Now the Muslims need to ensure that peace doesn't happen, short of the destruction of Israel. They simply won't allow that, and lives mean little to them.
There's no differance between us, we all want to live, laugh and grow old. That's simply untrue; it's a construction of your own naivete and desires, not reality. Talk to any anthropologist or sociologist.

[rockwool]

Things were looking crook for Israel for a while there back in 1973. Nowadays the US or NATO will almost certainly intervene if the existence of Israel is threatened.

Its a pity Israel wasn't left to grow in peace. It used to have a some what different view on things that started to change in the 70's. The philosophy of the kibbutz's used to permeate the whole country. No doubt all the Arab wars against them have contributed a large part in making it this extremist state.

The situaton with the Hamas government today is that they haven't recognized Israel as a state. The Swedish and other western governments have expressed that if Hamas don't recognize Israel they will ot have anything to do with them, nor will the aid to Palestine continue.
Strangely there has been no mention of that Israel haven't recognized Palestine eather!
Abbas, the president of Palestine have been pressuring Hamas to recognize Israel and threatening them with new elections if they don't comply. Strangely the PLO, the party Abbas belongs to, never had any pressure as a ruling party from any country to recognize Israel!

Does that show how biased western governments and mainstream media is against Hamas and the Palestinians in general?

[Silver]

Does that show how biased western governments and mainstream media is against Hamas and the Palestinians in general?

I don't think so. I think it shows how shallow and superficial most media stories in the US are. (And if you don't think that is true, compare any weekly US newsmagazine to the Economist. Our media sucks, and it sucks because of what we like to see.)

In my view the problem is that "normal" media in North America won't point out that Israel has some serious issues it needs to address, and at the same time the fringe media won't point out that Hamas/Hezbollah/etc. are wrong as well.

[rockwool]

changleen, the idea of the modern state of israel does NOT date back to post wwii. in fact, there is a explicit mention of it as a proposed goal for the zionist movement as early as the late 1800s.

now, israel is NOT the only country to come up from the balcanization of former EUROPEAN colonies. syria, jordan, lebanon and all those countries in the middle east came to existance thru nationalistic ideas, not so distant in concept from zionism.

there was a non-trivial jewish population in the area (with the self recognition of a people for as long as the arabs if not longer), who have the same right as syria or jordan so existance. and since this indigenous group has a right to self-determination, whoever they deemed to fit help them, or to move in, is totally up to them on any arbitrary ground (like judaism), as with any other state/ethnic group.
and as you see, there is no need to mention god or recur to any non-secular argument.....

so, its not about "the odd one" out based on "they came from abroad" in the simplistic sense, since there are some who are indigenous to the area who have all the right to invite over to their share whoever they want, specially if based on jus sanguinis, and those in turn, have then every right as the indigenous ones based on jus soli....

you could say they are "the odd one" based on the fact they are ethinical minority... but then, it could also be argued on that basis, removing all blacks from the states (even indigenous US born blacks) would be "logical if they left".


Sadly we are led to belive that zionism is the only Jewish movement.

All countries/people that have been occupied have had nationalistic movements and ideas.
But as far as I know zionism is the only one to have had two UN resolutions against them for beeing racist.

[rockwool]

That said, you'll see in one of my later posts that I don't think it's possible to actually accomplish the destruction of Hizbullah through military means, however desirable it may be. And you're right that sometimes killing certainly ISN'T the answer, or the best or most permanent. Everything's case-by-case...but to reject violence as an option or a reality is folly.That's precisely what the Muslim extremists want, actually. The Jewish extremist settlers have finally been (mostly) overcome within Israel by its moderates in the name of a peaceful future...or an attempt at it, at least. (Note: this doesn't make Israel a bunch of angels, nor does it make amends for past atrocities, but it's practically the best they can do now.) The Israelis defied the extreme elements within their society and began withdrawals from contested territories, which was amenable to all. Now the Muslims need to ensure that peace doesn't happen, short of the destruction of Israel. They simply won't allow that, and lives mean little to them. That's simply untrue; it's a construction of your own naivete and desires, not reality. Talk to any anthropologist or sociologist.

I'm not a pacifist, sadly, but the amount of violence from Israel is waaay to much.

Don't take it as the Jewish settlers have been overcome by Israels moderates. That is simple smoke screen tactic. Israel has no intention of pulling out of the West Bank or Eastern Jerusalem.

Definately my desires, maybe naivete too. But the only reason lives mean so little to them is becase so many of them dying every year while the rest of the world allowes this to happen, and by that showing the fact that their lives aren't worth a damn thing.

[ALEXIS_DH]

Sadly we are led to belive that zionism is the only Jewish movement.

All countries/people that have been occupied have had nationalistic movements and ideas.
But as far as I know zionism is the only one to have had two UN resolutions against them for beeing racist.

when did i say, or suggested, zionist is the only jewish movement????

i believe you are talking about a resolution from the mid70s... that was revoked in 1991.
did you know that too? or just forgot to write it....

[ALEXIS_DH]

I'm not a pacifist, sadly, but the amount of violence from Israel is waaay to much.

Don't take it as the Jewish settlers have been overcome by Israels moderates. That is simple smoke screen tactic. Israel has no intention of pulling out of the West Bank or Eastern Jerusalem.

Definately my desires, maybe naivete too. But the only reason lives mean so little to them is becase so many of them dying every year while the rest of the world allowes this to happen, and by that showing the fact that their lives aren't worth a damn thing.

pulling out from 90% of the west bank was offered in camp david in 2000.
arafat flat out rejected the offer without making any counter-offer.

any expectative of israel pulling out from the entire west bank and jerusalem is flat out dellusional. it was a heck of a war for them to keep that land. is naive to believe israel will concede jerusalem specially to the palestinian authority.
plus anyways, it was taken from jordan (who in turn took it after 48), and could be rightly argued a form of war reparation.

[rockwool]

I don't think so. I think it shows how shallow and superficial most media stories in the US are. (And if you don't think that is true, compare any weekly US newsmagazine to the Economist. Our media sucks, and it sucks because of what we like to see.)

In my view the problem is that "normal" media in North America won't point out that Israel has some serious issues it needs to address, and at the same time the fringe media won't point out that Hamas/Hezbollah/etc. are wrong as well.

Ohh, belive me I know it's true! It's worse on your side of the pond but its not far from the same thing over here.
The "fringe" left wing media over here is allot better. But you can't just read that eather cus they do fault. I've found it best to complement that with finacial papers because they are only filled with facts (so th ebig boys can make the right bets), while all the emotional crap is left out. What I've found with them is that they almost allways confirm what's been written in the leftist press.

A few years back it was on the news over here how much an average US citizen is exposed to media in comparisson to a Swede. All forms acounted for; printed, radioed and televised:
the Swede was exposed for an average of 8 hours/day,
the American for 14hours/day.
What they discussed was the effect that that type of exposure has on the human mind subconciously..

[rockwool]

when did i say, or suggested, zionist is the only jewish movement????

i believe you are talking about a resolution from the mid70s... that was revoked in 1991.
did you know that too? or just forgot to write it....

You didn't. I just wanted to put some light to it.

I don't know from what years they are, only that there were two of them. One of them revoked? No, didn't know that eather.

[ALEXIS_DH]

I don't know from what years they are, only that there were two of them. One of them revoked? No, didn't know that eather.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_General_Assembly_Resolution_3379

lol, i find a bit amusing and ironic you said "Sadly we are led to beleive....." just before quoting slanted information....

[rockwool]

pulling out from 90% of the west bank was offered in camp david in 2000.
arafat flat out rejected the offer without making any counter-offer.

any expectative of israel pulling out from the entire west bank and jerusalem is flat out dellusional. it was a heck of a war for them to keep that land. is naive to believe israel will concede jerusalem specially to the palestinian authority.
plus anyways, it was taken from jordan (who in turn took it after 48), and could be rightly argued a form of war reparation.

I don't belive what I'm hearing. Would a colonization be justified by the amount of loss that they had? ****, don't tell Germany cus tey'll start claiming allot. And Japan? thy lost allot more numbers than Germany...
Of course Arafat rejected it. It is not Israels 10% to keep. Neither is Eastern Jerusalem.
If you tell a judge -ohh, hell no I'm not leaving them diamonds back, I got shot and had to run like a mf, thru my selfe of buildings before I got caught and beaten up by the popo, ****, I'm keepin that!??

We have to obey the law of our countries, like Israel has to obey the UN.

Reparation? Let Israel ask for a sum. Alsass and Lothringen is not to be bargained for.

[rockwool]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_General_Assembly_Resolution_3379

lol, i find a bit amusing and ironic you said "Sadly we are led to beleive....." just before quoting slanted information....

Why is that slanted? Do you hear any other ideology than zionism beeing mentioned by the media? They have equaled zionism with judeism. That is slanted!

[ALEXIS_DH]

Why is that slanted? Do you hear any other ideology than zionism beeing mentioned by the media? They have equaled zionism with judeism. That is slanted!

slanted is to quote incomplete information to give the impression something is what it not really is.

i wonder where did you get that bit of information???
because, whoever told you about resolution 3379 without mentioning 4686 is definately not a reliable source...
and kinda makes me wonder if it was propaganda to "led you to believe"...

I don't belive what I'm hearing. Would a colonization be justified by the amount of loss that they had? ****, don't tell Germany cus tey'll start claiming allot. And Japan? thy lost allot more numbers than Germany...
Of course Arafat rejected it. It is not Israels 10% to keep. Neither is Eastern Jerusalem.
If you tell a judge -ohh, hell no I'm not leaving them diamonds back, I got shot and had to run like a mf, thru my selfe of buildings before I got caught and beaten up by the popo, ****, I'm keepin that!??

We have to obey the law of our countries, like Israel has to obey the UN.

Reparation? Let Israel ask for a sum. Alsass and Lothringen is not to be bargained for.

no country "has" to obbey UN. even if you were right, and sovereignty ceased to exist, then it would still make no sense, since the legal nature of un resolutions is of "recommendations".
in practice, most of them are non-binding. plus, like with resolution 3379... UN is not free from mistakes, and sometimes can take decades before correcting them...

2ndable. the diamonds analogy is wrong. israel did not steal the land, israel fought a defensive war in 67 (tiran blockade being fair and square casus belli), thus it not stole the land, unless you believe the allies "stole" germany for 5 years.... they have a hold on the land rooted on a legitimate defensive war...

about the reparation being a sum... that´s wrong too. there is recent legal precedent in customary international law of sovereignity over land as a valid form of war reparation. poland after wwii for example.

[jdcamb]

Whatever enemies it can find...hide your AK47 and you're just another Lebanese citizen. I think Hizbullah, despite the tough talk, knows that 'war' with Israel is impossible...they'll bait Israel in, let it roll through a few insignificant militia skirmishes, and either wear them down guerilla/terrorist-style if they remain to occupy, or go back to flinging rockets over the border when they withdraw.

MD

The IDF has a new slash and burn process of targeting. It seems to be directed towards economic targets and the infrastructure. I think it may be more effective in attaining their goals and creating pressure on hezbollah. Expose the terrorists to the surface, take them out or create chaos and confusion amongst the populace, then let the lebanese decide whether they want their new found prosperity back or to live in war and isloation. Either way southern Lebanon is history.

[Transcend]

They elected govts that support terrorism or are actual terrorists themselves. Hmm, what a surprise that N8 doesn't like a group that advocates destruction.

That's funny, he loves your country's government. Last I checked you invaded 2 countries againt all tennets international law. Pot, meet kettle.

A little biased, are we?

[Kevin]

Just something I thought you might find interesting.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7828123714384920696&q=Peace,+Propaganda+%26+The+Promised+Land

Dont know if its been posted yet since I didnt read the whole thread...

[rockwool]

slanted is to quote incomplete information to give the impression something is what it not really is.

i wonder where did you get that bit of information???
because, whoever told you about resolution 3379 without mentioning 4686 is definately not a reliable source...
and kinda makes me wonder if it was propaganda to "led you to believe"...



no country "has" to obbey UN. even if you were right, and sovereignty ceased to exist, then it would still make no sense, since the legal nature of un resolutions is of "recommendations".
in practice, most of them are non-binding. plus, like with resolution 3379... UN is not free from mistakes, and sometimes can take decades before correcting them...

2ndable. the diamonds analogy is wrong. israel did not steal the land, israel fought a defensive war in 67 (tiran blockade being fair and square casus belli), thus it not stole the land, unless you believe the allies "stole" germany for 5 years.... they have a hold on the land rooted on a legitimate defensive war...

about the reparation being a sum... that´s wrong too. there is recent legal precedent in customary international law of sovereignity over land as a valid form of war reparation. poland after wwii for example.

K, I had to look up slanted in the dictioinary and the way I got it explained was that it meant the same thing as biased.
Biased is something massmedia is when they mention zionism. By not mentioning that not all Jews are zionists, they lead us to belive that there is no "internal" critisism among Jews to this ideology and there for no other solution to Palestine/Israel. Hence "lead us to belive".

I got the info from a site on Palestine. Questionable? Yes, since it did not come from the source, UN.
Do you mean purposefull propaganda from my side?

Many years have passed since their last DEFENSIVE war. Frikkin decades. They can't play that record foreverandeverandever..
Since then, they have been colonizing the occupied terretories. They want to make them a part of Greater Israel. They are trying to brake the spirit of a whole nation of people so they will move out..

I won't argue about the legal nature of UN resolutions, but a lot of people are suffering due to legal technicalities.. I can't just sit back and let that happen without saying anything.
Can you tell me, for how many more years do you think Palestinians should live and die in a rathole? How much more psychological warfare do Palestinians have to be victims of, before you think they've had enough?

Please inform me about Poland, I'm not following you here.

[Silver]

I wonder how many Israelis the Canadians are justified in killing now? Is it a 1:1 ratio? Anyone have an exchange rate?

[rockwool]

Just something I thought you might find interesting.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7828123714384920696&q=Peace,+Propaganda+%26+The+Promised+Land

Dont know if its been posted yet since I didnt read the whole thread...

Commie Crap

jk
Take some time and watch this. It also explains allot how the media works in the USA!

[Changleen]

I note Israel are hitting oil refineries now... :rolleyes: "Going after the terrorists"

Sometimes the agendas are just so... obvious... This whole thing is a giant, un-funny, lethal joke.

[Kevin]

Commie Crap

Ok stay ignorant all you want. Im sure your a lot smarter and better informed then say a Noam Chomsky...
Here's some more info for people who dont have their heads up their asses.



the real story in the eyes of Noam Chomsky, professor of linguistics and philosophy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, author of dozens of books. His latest is Failed States: The Abuse of Power and the Assault on Democracy. In May, he traveled to Beirut, where he met, among others, Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah.




NOAM CHOMSKY: Well, it begins with the Hamas election. Israel and the United States at once announced that they were going to punish the people of Palestine for voting the wrong way in a free election. And the punishment has been severe.

At the same time, it's partly in Gaza, and sort of hidden in a way, but even more extreme in the West Bank, where Olmert announced his annexation program, what’s euphemistically called “convergence” and described here often as a “withdrawal,” but in fact it’s a formalization of the program of annexing the valuable lands, most of the resources, including water, of the West Bank and cantonizing the rest and imprisoning it, since he also announced that Israel would take over the Jordan Valley.
Gaza, itself, the latest phase, began on June 24. It was when Israel abducted two Gaza civilians, a doctor and his brother. We don't know their names. You don’t know the names of victims. They were taken to Israel, presumably, and nobody knows their fate. The next day, something happened, which we do know about, a lot. ‘Militants’ in Gaza, probably Islamic Jihad, abducted an Israeli soldier across the border. That’s Corporal Gilad Shalit. And that's well known; first abduction is not. Then followed the escalation of Israeli attacks on Gaza, which I don’t have to repeat. It’s reported on adequately.

The next stage was Hezbollah's abduction of two Israeli soldiers, they say on the border. Their official reason for this is that they are aiming for prisoner release. There are a few, nobody knows how many. Officially, there are three Lebanese prisoners in Israel. There's allegedly a couple hundred people missing. Who knows where they are?

But the real reason, I think it's generally agreed by analysts, is that -- I’ll read from the Financial Times, which happens to be right in front of me. “The timing and scale of its attack suggest it was partly intended to reduce the pressure on Palestinians by forcing Israel to fight on two fronts simultaneously.” David Hearst, who knows this area well, describes it, I think this morning, as a display of solidarity with suffering people, the clinching impulse.

It's a very -- mind you -- very irresponsible act. It subjects Lebanese to possible -- certainly to plenty of terror and possible extreme disaster. Whether it can achieve any result, either in the secondary question of freeing prisoners or the primary question of some form of solidarity with the people of Gaza, I hope so, but I wouldn't rank the probabilities very high.

[rockwool]

Man you can't listen to Noam Chomsky, he's a Jew.
The hole documentary was filled with self hating Jews..
Have they no team spirit? Traitors!

"convergerance" -Yeh, we used to speak that language too as kids but we called it "theotherwayaround language".

Financial Times? Seems like when you cut the sentimental crap out that the moguls want to feed us with, and just leave facts to reflect over, you end up with rational conclusions.
But to say that massmedia "leads us to belive" stuff to misslead us, that somebody mentioned a page back, is just plain bs. Would never happen. Maybe in Russia, not the free world.

[Kevin]

Man you can't listen to Noam Chomsky, he's a Jew.
The hole documentary was filled with self hating Jews..
Have they no team spirit? Traitors!

"convergerance" -Yeh, we used to speak that language too as kids but we called it "theotherwayaround language".

Financial Times? Seems like when you cut the sentimental crap out that the moguls want to feed us with, and just leave facts to reflect over, you end up with rational conclusions.
But to say that massmedia "leads us to belive" stuff to misslead us, that somebody mentioned a page back, is just plain bs. Would never happen. Maybe in Russia, not the free world.


Haha the free world? What do you think the "free world" is?
Theres no such thing...
Anyways Im not gonna argue with someone who doesnt want to know, Ive tried that before but its no use talking to a deaf man.

:wave:

[rockwool]

Haha the free world? What do you think the "free world" is?
Theres no such thing...
Anyways Im not gonna argue with someone who doesnt want to know, Ive tried that before but its no use talking to a deaf man.

:wave:

No, seriously, please explain, this thread needs it!


My commie crap remark was ironical. That documentary really showed what allot of us have been trying to say here, but better and also brought up a few new things to give light to this conflict.

[rockwool]

Israel prepares to invade Syria.

http://prisonplanet.com/articles/july2006/160706israelprepares.htm

cut from the thread above:
"No mention here of the hundreds of Lebanese held illegally in Israeli torture dungeons. Earlier this month, the Lebanese government complained to the UN Secretary General representative in Beirut about “the nonstop arrest of detainees, and … the hundreds of missing persons, which poses as a violation of human rights.”"

[rockwool]

:rofl:

Girl Fight!!!!!

You're a riddle N8

[rockwool]

Might as well quote The Onion than that rubbish... :p

On the contrary, you should check the stories of CNN, CBS, FOX with the same story frome sites like this.
Why that is, is verry well explained in that documentary Kevin linked to.

Israel is doing the World a favor but smacking down militant terrorists and the organizitions that feed them. If they can rid south Lebanon of Hezbollah/Syria, they will be doing the Lebanese government a huge favor.

In the article the truth comes out that Israel has been kidnapping Lebanese since they invaded that country (in 82?), not to mention all political prisoners held without trial in Israeli prisonns..

That is the real terrorist state.