Israel about to get its ass kicked by piratenews

America loves a winner!

I'd put my $$ on US backed armor against the diaper heads, every damn day of the week and twice on Sunday.

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 4:05 AM

WHOZIT

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
I'd put my $$ on US backed armor against the diaper heads, every damn day of the week and twice on Sunday.

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

DITTO!

I'm going to microwave a bagel and have sex with it - Peter Griffin

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 6:20 AM

RIVERLOVE

Whether Israel wins or loses, they lose. They lose on a multitude of levels. Besides, there's nothing to win. I recognize their absolute right to stop rockets and missiles from flying into their country, but once again I feel they have screwed up the response royally, just like they did against Hezbollah two years ago.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 6:43 AM

WHOZIT

Quote:
Originally posted by Riverlove:
Whether Israel wins or loses, they lose. They lose on a multitude of levels. Besides, there's nothing to win. I recognize their absolute right to stop rockets and missiles from flying into their country, but once again I feel they have screwed up the response royally, just like they did against Hezbollah two tears ago.

You may be rite, read this; http://www.nypost.com/seven/01012009/news/columnists/bam_stirs_fears_i
n_israel_146762.htm

I'm going to microwave a bagel and have sex with it - Peter Griffin

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 7:21 AM

I'm about to find myself in strange company that includes Whozit.

Israel will win.

There's a story that didn't get a lot of coverage over here.

Israel was intending to clusterbomb Lebanon. The US convinced the Israelis to use our new and improved clusterbombs. These are ones we used in Iraq.

The old model scatters WWII "Katies" over a wide area. The new one scatters small land mines. In Iraq, the pentagon stated that a certain number of IED attacks were actually our guys driving over own unexploded cluster munitions. When asked for a number, they said "could be as high as 95%."

This picture makes perfect sense. Watch a video of a desert crawler thrown thirty feet into the air, or a Hummer reduced to scrap metal, and you realize that a homemade pipe bomb probably didn't do that.

We did the same thing in Serbia, but we never sent in our troops to hit them.

Well, Israel was unaware that 50% of these bombs would not explode on contact, and that this would mean that S. Lebanon would be littered with landmines. So, they bombed, and then rolled in, and ran over the mines they had just scattered. It was an own goal. This was widely viewed as a victory for Hamas and Hezbollah, but Israel didn't turn on them for blame, they turned on us. They were furious that they had just send their own guys into a minefield, because their original plan probably would have worked.

They won't make the mistake again, and Gaza has no friendly borders or allies, and no defense. Gaza will get owned. It would be better for them to surrender post haste, and then consider relocating. The problem is that people are very attached to land, and they are too reliant on other people for help. They'll flee somewhere and ask for refuge, when they should go set up their own colony somewhere else. They should look over at the jews and say "Huh, that worked, let's organize like that, and displace someone else" Israel's mistake, long term, IMHO, was to pick a piece of land for religious reasons that was heaily populated. Most of the earth is not. They could easily set up in the are at a less densely populated area if they didn't want to live under Israeli rule.

I would urge people not to be racist in their positions. I mean, stop and think of how others are likely to view some of the terms used. I'm not talking about muslims and muslim sympathizers, but just regular folk.

Here's an easy way to self analyze how this might be perceived: Take your text and replace it mentally with another ethnic group or country.

For instance, try the target ethnic group and consider our conflicts in Somalia. Now consider how it would read if you said "we should've kicked those n*ggers asses." Or, take the reverse position and say "Given the superior soviet weaponry, it's easy to see why k*ke-istan was defeated." Here's another, "We would've beaten the g**ks if the ch*nks weren't arming them." None of these are acceptable.

In that vein, you're sure to eventually offend everyone. If you want to win your point, that's not the best tactical move.

Don't assume that the same language towards muslims will ever be any more acceptable than the epithets I quoted above.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 7:44 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Riverlove:
Whether Israel wins or loses, they lose. They lose on a multitude of levels. Besides, there's nothing to win. I recognize their absolute right to stop rockets and missiles from flying into their country, but once again I feel they have screwed up the response royally, just like they did against Hezbollah two years ago.

This isn't S. Lebanon and Hezbollah. It's a different scenario, though similar tactics are being used by Hamas. The Jews know Gaza, for starters. They know the terrain, the area, having lived there, only a few yrs ago.

But what would you have Israel do, as rockets rain down on your country , day after day ? How have they " screwed up the response " ?? This, I'd like to know.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 7:59 AM

WHOZIT

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
I'm about to find myself in strange company that includes Whozit.

Israel will win.

There's a story that didn't get a lot of coverage over here.

Israel was intending to clusterbomb Lebanon. The US convinced the Israelis to use our new and improved clusterbombs. These are ones we used in Iraq.

The old model scatters WWII "Katies" over a wide area. The new one scatters small land mines. In Iraq, the pentagon stated that a certain number of IED attacks were actually our guys driving over own unexploded cluster munitions. When asked for a number, they said "could be as high as 95%."

This picture makes perfect sense. Watch a video of a desert crawler thrown thirty feet into the air, or a Hummer reduced to scrap metal, and you realize that a homemade pipe bomb probably didn't do that.

We did the same thing in Serbia, but we never sent in our troops to hit them.

Well, Israel was unaware that 50% of these bombs would not explode on contact, and that this would mean that S. Lebanon would be littered with landmines. So, they bombed, and then rolled in, and ran over the mines they had just scattered. It was an own goal. This was widely viewed as a victory for Hamas and Hezbollah, but Israel didn't turn on them for blame, they turned on us. They were furious that they had just send their own guys into a minefield, because their original plan probably would have worked.

They won't make the mistake again, and Gaza has no friendly borders or allies, and no defense. Gaza will get owned. It would be better for them to surrender post haste, and then consider relocating. The problem is that people are very attached to land, and they are too reliant on other people for help. They'll flee somewhere and ask for refuge, when they should go set up their own colony somewhere else. They should look over at the jews and say "Huh, that worked, let's organize like that, and displace someone else" Israel's mistake, long term, IMHO, was to pick a piece of land for religious reasons that was heaily populated. Most of the earth is not. They could easily set up in the are at a less densely populated area if they didn't want to live under Israeli rule.

I would urge people not to be racist in their positions. I mean, stop and think of how others are likely to view some of the terms used. I'm not talking about muslims and muslim sympathizers, but just regular folk.

Here's an easy way to self analyze how this might be perceived: Take your text and replace it mentally with another ethnic group or country.

For instance, try the target ethnic group and consider our conflicts in Somalia. Not consider how it would read if you said "we should've kicked those n*ggers asses." Or, take the reverse position and say "Given the superior soviet weaponry, it's easy to see why k*ke-istan was defeated." Here's another, "We would've beaten the g**ks if the ch*nks weren't arming them."

In that vein, you're sure to eventually offend everyone. If you want to win your point, that's not the best tactical move.

Welcome to the dark side

I'm going to microwave a bagel and have sex with it - Peter Griffin

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 9:20 AM

Auraptor,

Consider first that most everyone on this forum is very well informed on most issues. Enough so as not to know to be leery of MSM.

That said, okay, let's look at this objectively:

Assume for starters that we can ignore MSM and everything it says. That's safe.

Next, assume that Hamas is trying to act in its own best interests. This is obvious. If they launch rockets, it's a feeble quixotic counterattack, but mostly, they plea for a ceasefire.

So, why is Israel getting bombed? Because they're killing Palestinians relentlessly and have been for 60 years.

Why don't they get bombed more? Because the balance of bombs is not even. Because of Hamas knows this, they don't support bombing if there is a peaceful option.

But put yourself in their shoes. Recently I had an argument with people here who were ready to pick up their handguns to defend against the NWO. That's hopelessly quixotic. But, if you have no other option, that's what you might do. Gaza, at the moment, has no other option. Israel has refused a ceasefire repeatedly, because they think they can win this war and own Gaza.

What would I have Israel do?

1. Agree to a ceasefire. Will this stop the bombings? No. Because there are random muslims with bombs.

2. Tell Hamas to reign in those random muslims with bombs. Hamas will respond with "We can't" which is true. They don't have anywhere near the level of control over their own people that Israel has. Perhaps this has something to do with being occupied, and not having a superpower backer, but we'll leave that lie for the moment.

3. Israel should then respond with, we'll help you. And then not invade, but send Israeli soldiers who could maintain control over all the Israeli military equipment, while assisting Hamas in restoring order.

This isn't about trust. You don't have to trust Hamas. This is about evolution. You can trust Hamas to act in the interests of its own survival. If you trusted Hamas, you would give them the tools necessary to defeat their rogue elements. But you can assist them without ever trusting them.

Hamas is aware that it is likely to lose this war. The paestinians are not some lunatic virgin craving suicide society, they are people on the total edge of desperation. The are outgunned 1000 to one or more. Their opponent has not only US backing, but nukes, fighter and bomber planes, surface to air, surface to surface, anti aircraft, anti-missile. etc.

The Israeli govt. is behaving the way it is because it's unaccountable, and sees no repercussions. But they also have to realize that this is not going to stop unless they exterminate the 6 million remaining Palestinians, once they have secured the whole territory. In fact, it's probably worse for Israel to have these people inside of the borders of Israel than out.

The comparisons between WWII Germany and present day Israel are made daily, and often by jews. Anecdotally, that's where I hear it from. If they want to truly secure that parallel in peoples minds forever, exterminating 6 million semites would be a surefire way to do it.

Achieving peace with ones neighbors is not about invading and securing breathing room. Israel is operating under the principle of "Because we can" and as long as the US says nothing, they can probably get away with it. But this is tremendously harmful to Israel in the long run.

Consider another re-colonization effort: Sierra Leone. Sierra Leone has probably now permanently sacrificed any chance of being the world's voice for disenfranchised blacks. Instead, they've cemented their reputation as the world's #1 reaver state.

Currenly, less than 15% of American jews fully support Israel. That's terrible, from their perspective. Why so little jewish support? I think this one is equally obvious: All humans are operating in self interest. While having a homeland state is excellent protection against persecution (What the Tutsis wouldn't have given for a distant homeland state they could have fled to.) It's not as important as image. Israel is making jews look bad. It's spiking a rise of anti-semetism, because, objectively, they're behaving badly.

I admit, yes, the terrorist attacks in Israel are a problem. But also, put it in perspective:

More people are killed each year in terrorist attacks in Chicago than in Israel. And this has been true since the 1930s. Now the windy city has several mafias, at least the original, the russian, and two black ones, bloods and crips, all of whom commit acts of terrorism. I read there are an average of 9 bombings a year in Chicago. I was there recently, and was shot at, a block from Obama's house. But also, being there for one day, I witness 8 separate gang wars outside of that incident. Shortly after leaving, the upstairs neighbors of my friends were killed, someone robbing them murdered the entire family. Now the above mentioned friends, and their neighbors were white. All of the shooters and gang fighters were black.

What would you have the whites of chicago do, bomb the blacks? Round them up in camps? Exterminated them? Or would you have them try to assist with law enforcement issues.

I think this is a fair comparison. Population of Chicago and Israel are fairly similar. But no one is carpet bombing hyde park or the south side.

[edit] I didn't realize that Riverlove had posted this, and you were responding to her. Still, I leave this comment. I agree with her remarks. I enumerated my reasons I thought that it was bad for Israel, esp. since they want to attract jewish immigrants. And yes, they should stop terrorists, but they are going to have to work with Palestinian authorities in order to do so. Their standing with Palestinian authorities at the moment is undoubtedly even lower than it is with jews. They will have to work on that. But that's the only war this is getting solved.

Also, a footnote: Palestine is not the only party here with reaver problems. Israel has a few of its own, who go into Palestinian territories and start killing muslims. This does not help anyone. It's another issue that will have to be dealt with to restore mutual respect.

Remember, a decisive military victory can leave you hated by your own people for decades, until you collapse: I'm referring to the soviet union of course, but they are not a lone example.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 9:39 AM

RIVERLOVE

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:
Originally posted by Riverlove:
Whether Israel wins or loses, they lose. They lose on a multitude of levels. Besides, there's nothing to win. I recognize their absolute right to stop rockets and missiles from flying into their country, but once again I feel they have screwed up the response royally, just like they did against Hezbollah two years ago.

This isn't S. Lebanon and Hezbollah. It's a different scenario, though similar tactics are being used by Hamas. The Jews know Gaza, for starters. They know the terrain, the area, having lived there, only a few yrs ago.

But what would you have Israel do, as rockets rain down on your country , day after day ? How have they " screwed up the response " ?? This, I'd like to know.

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

I did say before that I support Israel's absolute right to defend itself against rockets and missiles. It's just the response I find horrible. Bombing & killing hundreds, wounding thousands of civilians in apartment buildings and mosques is in-excusable. Israel's been under these rocket attacks for many years. For all this time they don't seem to have any imagination for quick victory or less-deadly alternatives. But they're real good at blowing up civilian infrastructure from supersonic sorties by the hundreds. Their strategy seems to be kill 500 women and kids for every Hamas leader killed. Where are their precision drone plane killers like we have? Or elite commando units?, or in-country assassination teams? This pending ground invasion is reminiscent of the razings of all the Polish ghettos during WWII. And then what kind of bloody, deadly and disgusting mess is going to be left there? Compared to what the Nazis did to Jews in WWII, a few rockets fired into their country that kill almost no Israelis seems like a tea party, and a very weak case to make to become what their former tormentors were to them. They should have done more to avoid or lessen this possibly politically-motivated aggression.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 10:02 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Auraptor,

Consider first that most everyone on this forum is very well informed on most issues. Enough so as not to know to be leery of MSM.

That said, okay, let's look at this objectively:

Assume for starters that we can ignore MSM and everything it says. That's safe.

Next, assume that Hamas is trying to act in its own best interests. This is obvious. If they launch rockets, it's a feeble quixotic counterattack, but mostly, they plea for a ceasefire.

Hamas has never plead for any ceasefire they have ever honored. You’re entire post can basically be dismissed because it’s based on the completely spurious assumption that Hamas is peace loving, friendly and fuzzy.

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
3. Israel should then respond with, we'll help you. And then not invade, but send Israeli soldiers who could maintain control over all the Israeli military equipment, while assisting Hamas in restoring order.

This is the hilarious part. You blame everything on Israel as evil occupiers then insist that the solution is Israeli occupation. HaHa.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 10:35 AM

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Quote:

But what would you have Israel do, as rockets rain down on your country , day after day ? How have they " screwed up the response " ?? This, I'd like to know.

In my opinion, they screwed up the response by targeting EVERYBODY in Gaza, and have only started getting it right in the last few days, when they started specifically targeting Hamas leadership and eliminating them.

See, targeting a person and taking him out with a few collateral casualties, I can make a case for; carpetbombing one of the most densely-populated areas on Earth because of a few primitive rockets being fired from somewhere in it, is a bit of overkill in response. Think of it in WWII terms - answering a few buzz-bombs lobbed into England with the firebombing of Dresden. You might be within your rights to do such a thing, but the tide of public opinion is probably going to swing against you. And Israel NEEDS public opinion on its side, especially when so much of its defense budget comes straight from us.

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 11:17 AM

Israel did not use any carpet bombing, at all. Israel was using tactical air support (F-16 and Apache) all armed with guided missiles, which were used against specific targets. Carpet bombing is carried out with strategic bombers that drop payloads of ballistic munitions.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 12:18 PM

First,

Riverlove

Of course, I concur completely. No argument here. The only issue is how to change the abberant behavior. Deploring it is easy, but we are powerless to do anything about it.

FINN

I have never assumed anything of the kind, I assume only the logical conclusion that Hamas acts in its own self interest. This does not mean that they have complete control over their own religious zealots.

Quote:
This is the hilarious part. You blame everything on Israel as evil occupiers then insist that the solution is Israeli occupation. HaHa.

It surprises me at this point that you are employed. Your skill in discourse is unparalleled. Israeli assistance to stablizing Hamas is not an occupation, it would probably be welcomed, just as the Iraqi govt. and even the US military have welcomed an Iranian intervention to stabilize Iraq. Iran has been hesitant, because it is paranoid of doing anything that might be used as a pretext for invasion.

BTW, the Israelis carpet bombed S. Lebanon, this I got from a source you may not trust, but it's called the govt. of Israel. They sent us a long rant about how much our replacement of cluster munitions had screwed up their invasion plan.

Quote:
In my opinion, they screwed up the response by targeting EVERYBODY in Gaza, and have only started getting it right in the last few days, when they started specifically targeting Hamas leadership and eliminating them.

They should not target Hamas, Hamas is not the enemy. Hamas is the duly elected govt. If they agreed to a ceasefire, yes, Hamas would honor it. Random radicals would not. If the press says that such and such and attack is coming from Hamas, that's not credible unless Hamas claims credit for it.

The Palestinian people collectively are far less ammenable to an accord than is Hamas.

See, targeting a person and taking him out with a few collateral casualties, I can make a case for; carpetbombing one of the most densely-populated areas on Earth because of a few primitive rockets being fired from somewhere in it, is a bit of overkill in response. Think of it in WWII terms - answering a few buzz-bombs lobbed into England with the firebombing of Dresden. You might be within your rights to do such a thing, but the tide of public opinion is probably going to swing against you. And Israel NEEDS public opinion on its side, especially when so much of its defense budget comes straight from us.

Here's the thing which gets me:

I understand Israel's position very well. I understand the position of Hamas, the Palestinian terrorists, the people who support them, the other arab nations, Hezbollah, and Lebanon. I also understand the position of the govt. in DC, and the Pentagon, and the CIA. This isn't because I'm brilliant and precient, it's because they are straightforward and obvious.

What I don't understand is the position of FINN and Auraptor. Please enlighten me. I would hate to do you the disservice of assuming that your position is "all sand n*ggers must die because they are inferior monkey people." I would hope that you consider that this is in fact how your argument comes across, I'm sure to most people, even to the jewish and Israeli people, who would be offended by the defamation of their character that this would entail, to say nothing of the response that it might get from the Islamic world.

But I have to assume that underneath that is a more honest, straightforward and logical position, which has hitherto not seen the light of day. Assuming that, as I have no reason to assume prior to these posts, you are not in fact unabashed racists with a genocidal bent, I would think that it would behoove you to put aside the name calling and petty Rovian dismissal and try to make a more concise argument.

Let's dispense with the supposed threat that Gaza poses to Israel as nothing compared the threat posed by Israel to Gaza. Also, please consider the threat that Israel poses to the jewish position internationally, and to US military position vis a vis Israel as a valuable ally.

I am trying to come up with a logical analysis, but other than genocidal racism, the only alternative I can see is a desire to see the entrire thing develop into a full scale global conflict in the hopes of achieving a billion or so casualties, or to encourage a second holocaust against jewish people internationally. I know this is the goal of some people supporting this action, but I do not believe that it is yours, since you are both men of reason.

Now I put forth these extreme arguments not because I secretly think this is what you hold, but only so you can see how your posts would appear to the outside world. I'm aware that my own posts appear to be "muslim apologists" and as I said before, since I always support the defender unless the defender is committing genocide, in such a situation as the Sudanese Janjaweed in Darfur, then I know I am always bound to be misinterpreted at such. Actually I support Israel, my concerns are the damage that Israel is doing to itself, and the international community, and equally, the damage that it is doing to the people of Gaza.

If you decide to simply argue the point that I am always irrevocably wrong, I'll simply ignore this thread and move on. I just thought I would give you a chance to clarify your position, and distance yourself from "Zion Uber Alles," "Let's have another Holocaust of arabs," "Let's have another Holocaust of jews," "Kill the racial inferiors," or "Let's start WWIII." As none of these are attractive or sympathetic positions, I thought that you deserve a second chance to explain your positions. But please, don't insult the intelligence of your peers: We know that Israel is in no immediate danger, and that they are the aggressor, and in a state of civil war, Israel is little use to us as an ally, outside of the above named positions.

If I'm wrong, and you wish to support one of these positions, then either say so, say nothing, or argue with the premise of this post, and then I can ignore you from then on.

If you wish though, for everyone on the board, take a minute, and compose a logical position that we may all, to your astonishment, agree with.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 12:24 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
It surprises me at this point that you are employed. Your skill in discourse is unparalleled. Israeli assistance to stablizing Hamas is not an occupation, it would probably be welcomed, ...

Yes it would be welcome, by intelligent fair minded people, which is exactly what Israel has tried to do in the past. Of course, when they do this, you accuse them of being villainous and evil Jews murdering poor innocent and fuzzy Hamas.

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
…just as the Iraqi govt. and even the US military have welcomed an Iranian intervention to stabilize Iraq. Iran has been hesitant, because it is paranoid of doing anything that might be used as a pretext for invasion.

God you’re dumb.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 1:22 PM

Finn,

Or I know more about it than you do. I'm afraid that despite an effort to be personable, I have to call it how I see it.

You are an oxymoron.

You said it yourself, that you were military intelligence. Now I know why we're f^&king everything up. Finn is our brains.

Time to fire Finn and hire someone who actually understands the situation.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 1:37 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Israel did not use any carpet bombing, at all. Israel was using tactical air support (F-16 and Apache) all armed with guided missiles, which were used against specific targets. Carpet bombing is carried out with strategic bombers that drop payloads of ballistic munitions.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

Sorry, I should have clarified that I brought up carpetbombing as an illustrative device, an exaggeration to make a point. Believe it or not, I *am* aware that Israel didn't send massive numbers of B-17s, B-24s, Lancasters, and Wellingtons to drop 500-pound bombs on Gaza. Neither did they use the more-modern (but still 50 years old) B-52.

Their use of "precision" guided weapons really hasn't worked out as well as they'd hoped, though - unless it's your contention that they intentionally targeted civilian areas with them.

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 1:46 PM

Dreamtrove lays out a logical, well thought-out statement of his position and how and why he takes that position, and asks Finn to respond in kind:

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:

If you decide to simply argue the point that I am always irrevocably wrong, I'll simply ignore this thread and move on. I just thought I would give you a chance to clarify your position, and distance yourself from "Zion Uber Alles," "Let's have another Holocaust of arabs," "Let's have another Holocaust of jews," "Kill the racial inferiors," or "Let's start WWIII." As none of these are attractive or sympathetic positions, I thought that you deserve a second chance to explain your positions. But please, don't insult the intelligence of your peers: We know that Israel is in no immediate danger, and that they are the aggressor, and in a state of civil war, Israel is little use to us as an ally, outside of the above named positions.

If I'm wrong, and you wish to support one of these positions, then either say so, say nothing, or argue with the premise of this post, and then I can ignore you from then on.

If you wish though, for everyone on the board, take a minute, and compose a logical position that we may all, to your astonishment, agree with.

To which, the response is this:

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn Mac Humal:

God you’re dumb.

Beautiful. Our finest military minds at work. Now I know why we're in the mess we're in...

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 1:46 PM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

So Israel is back to killing Palestinians?

Whats new?

Our country should not be involved AT ALL in this conflict. Let them hash it out.

Israel is like the bully with the bigger, older, brother. If they lose a fight, they just call us. Or better yet, its the reason noone has wiped them out yet.

I say to hell with them. We've got problems enough here at home as it is.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 2:15 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Finn,

Or I know more about it than you do. I'm afraid that despite an effort to be personable, I have to call it how I see it.

You are an oxymoron.

You said it yourself, that you were military intelligence. Now I know why we're f^&king everything up. Finn is our brains.

Time to fire Finn and hire someone who actually understands the situation.

Actually I find your whole position amusing. You talk a lot, but you’re just bullshitting. You don’t understand anything about what you’re talking about. It’s just bullshit after bullshit. You’re a joke. You’re an apologist for every ruthless regime in the Middle East, and anti-Israeli to boot. Just a small selection of your wisdom:

Iran is universally accepted to be the world's most educated nation. Bullshit.

In israel, the Knesset is neither elected nor impeachable. Bullshit.

Iran has not invaded anyone in 2500 years. Bullshit.

In Israel, there are no muslims allowed to serve in (sic)parliament. Bullshit.

You apologies for Iran. You apologize for Hamas. You apologize for Hezbollah. You’re either hopelessly dumb or you want to see Jews murdered. Those are only two reasons for the positions you take on this issue.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 2:27 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Sorry, I should have clarified that I brought up carpetbombing as an illustrative device, an exaggeration to make a point. Believe it or not, I *am* aware that Israel didn't send massive numbers of B-17s, B-24s, Lancasters, and Wellingtons to drop 500-pound bombs on Gaza. Neither did they use the more-modern (but still 50 years old) B-52.

Their use of "precision" guided weapons really hasn't worked out as well as they'd hoped, though - unless it's your contention that they intentionally targeted civilian areas with them.

They’ve worked very well within in reason. But Hamas actively tries to create as much civilian bloodshed as possible by embedding its military infrastructure and soldiers within civilian populations, which is a pretty serious violation of Geneva Conventions. That’s not Israel's fault. The IDF targets Hamas military infrastructure and soldiers. They don’t target civilians. Hamas, by the way, does. People want to blame Israel for this, but I have yet to hear a cogent argument for why this is Israel’s fault.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 2:34 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"... by embedding its (Hamas') military infrastructure and soldiers within civilian populations ..."

1) Hamas may not be at work, there may be individuals not under its control.

2) The Gaza strip has a population of 1,482,405 (2007) in 360 sq miles. It would be hard to find a place NOT densely populated with civilians.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 2:43 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
"... by embedding its (Hamas') military infrastructure and soldiers within civilian populations ..."

1) Hamas may not be at work, there may be individuals not under its control.

2) The Gaza strip has a population of 1,482,405 (2007) in 360 sq miles. It would be hard to find a place NOT densely populated with civilians.

Hamas is directly responsible for a great deal of it. And Hamas is responsible for much of the fanaticism within the Palestinian territories. They have fostered that fanaticism through terror and propaganda. They’ve even promoted children’s television shows that teach hatred of Jews. Hamas is responsible. But even if you take the Dreamtrove approach and assume that Hamas is composed of warm fuzzy bunnies – if you assume they’re not responsible – that means that the government (Hamas) is not in control of the population. Therefore, the Gaza strip is an anarchy. Either way, it has to be controlled. If Hamas won’t do it, then Israel has to. And the longer this situation remains in limbo relying on humorous Hamas ceasefires, the more will die in the long run.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 2:45 PM

Quote:
People want to blame Israel for this, but I have yet to hear a cogent argument for why this is Israel’s fault.

You won't get one from me.

Israel played no part in launching the rockets into Israel initially. What they HAVE done is to go over the top with a non-proportional response, specifically targeting civilian areas.

Where Israel screwed up was in taking the bait. As DT made the comparison earlier, let's apply it a bit more here. Suppose you have a bunch of Crips hiding weapons and explosives (and maybe a meth lab or two) in a civilian-occupied apartment building. Is your best solution to simply blow it up, denying the Crips the use of the stuff inside while also killing an awful lot of people who might have had an idea what was up, but were in no way actively involved with the gang? Or would you seek to dismantle the leadership, create disorder in the gang, and then attempt to neutralize the weapons cache with less-violent means?

Look back up above, where I said that I thought they were on the right track when they started targeting Hamas leadership and taking them out. I have no real problem with that strategy. If Hamas won't keep its people in check, Israel will target the leaders of Hamas. Maybe the next guy in charge of Hamas will have more luck, or will listen better.

When you get to a point in a situation where your best-case scenario is to just say "kill everyone in the area", then you've already made some big, big mistakes before you ever got there.

It's a shit situation with no easy answers. And it's been that way for a long, long time.

If Hamas and the Palestinians were truly smart, they would come to the border with Israel in nothing but their underwear and just stand there. No violence. No bombs, no rockets. No weapons of any kind. Then we'd see what Israel's reaction would be. If they do nothing and leave the Palestinians alone, the Palestinians win an important victory, if only a moral one. If the Israelis massacre them, they show the world their true colors. If radical muslims want to be martyred for their cause, this would be their perfect chance, in full view of the world. They can make their case non-violently, or they can continue on with more of the same. Historically, which has a better chance of making a dent?

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 2:46 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"... that means that the government (Hamas) is not in control of the population ..."

As the US government is not in control of ITS population - not all of it.

Do you support a foreign occupier for the US on that basis ?

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 2:47 PM

Quote:
...by embedding its military infrastructure and soldiers within civilian populations, which is a pretty serious violation of Geneva Conventions.

Just by way of clarification, what do the Geneva Conventions have to say about specific targeting of known civilian areas and the use of bombs in those areas?

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 2:51 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"kill everyone in the area"

I keep waiting for a reporter to ask Israeli officals if they're looking for a permanent solution.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 2:52 PM

KIRKULES

Quote:
Originally posted by Riverlove:
Their strategy seems to be kill 500 women and kids for every Hamas leader killed. Where are their precision drone plane killers like we have? Or elite commando units?, or in-country assassination teams? This pending ground invasion is reminiscent of the razings of all the Polish ghettos during WWII. And then what kind of bloody, deadly and disgusting mess is going to be left there? Compared to what the Nazis did to Jews in WWII, a few rockets fired into their country that kill almost no Israelis seems like a tea party, and a very weak case to make to become what their former tormentors were to them. They should have done more to avoid or lessen this possibly politically-motivated aggression.

Why do you hold the Israelis to such a ridiculous standard. I suspect it's because you've never had missiles rain down on your neighborhood randomly. This isn't a war movie were a couple of commandos can go in and save the day. This in an entrenched terrorist group supported and enabled by the populace. Other than the children, there are no completely innocent victims. No country can win a war if they let the enemy set the terms of battle. The Palestinians have chosen to support the terrorists and therefore chosen to suffer the consequences. You seem to have forgotten that the purpose of this war is to stop the missiles for the long term not to exchange casualties with the enemy on their terms.

"No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country.
He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 2:56 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country.
He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."

I keep waiting for a reporter to ask Israeli officals if they're looking for a permanent solution.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 2:57 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
"... that means that the government (Hamas) is not in control of the population ..."

As the US government is not in control of ITS population - not all of it.

Do you support a foreign occupier for the US on that basis ?

Let me know when rogue factions of the US start bombing neighboring states, and then we can discuss that.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 3:00 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
...by embedding its military infrastructure and soldiers within civilian populations, which is a pretty serious violation of Geneva Conventions.

Just by way of clarification, what do the Geneva Conventions have to say about specific targeting of known civilian areas and the use of bombs in those areas?

Yes, the Geneva Conventions are opposed to those actions of Hamas as well.

On the other hand, the Geneva Conventions do not forbid the targeting of military infrastructure embedded in civilian populations. It simply forbids the embedding.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 3:02 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Anthrax attack ? Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building bombing ? The Mafia ? Crips and Bloods ?

Any and all of these would be reason for one area to take over another and 'pacify' it. Are you in favor of that ?

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 3:14 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Anthrax attack ? Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building bombing ? The Mafia ? Crips and Bloods ?

Any and all of these would be reason for one area to take over another and 'pacify' it. Are you in favor of that ?

Let me know when rogue factions within the US starts bombing neighboring states and then we can discuss that. And by “states” I mean Mexico or Canada. As far as the examples you mentioned, in all of those cases, the government stepped in and handled the offenders. So the government WAS in control. I would have thought that would have been obvious.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 3:16 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"As far as the examples you mentioned, in all of those cases, the government stepped in and handled the offenders."

Only in the case of the Murrah bombing. The anthrax case went unsolved, and, so far as I know, the Mafia, the Crips, the Bloods, and many other illegal organizations and their people, are still doing business today. So, no, it didn't 'handle' the offenders.

You still have a question to answer.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 3:22 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
"As far as the examples you mentioned, in all of those cases, the government stepped in and handled the offenders."

Only in the case of the Murrah bombing. The anthrax case went unsolved, and, so far as I know, the Mafia, the Crips, the Bloods, and many other illegal organizations and their people, are still doing business today. So, no, it didn't 'handle' the offenders.

The government has succeeded in infiltrating and bringing many of these elements. Including the Mafia, which never recovered from the loss of John Gotti. Gangs, narcotics and other illegal enterprises are kept in check by police. Either way the Government is there and it is dealing with all of these issues. Moving on.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 3:25 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Ahem ...

Dealing with it, but not controlled, which is the hallmark you yourself set.

You still have a question to answer.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 3:34 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Ahem ...

Dealing with it, but not controlled, which is the hallmark you yourself set.

You still have a question to answer.

I did answer it. I think that’s your real problem. Where are the rogue factions bombing Canada? Or Mexico? Show me where Hamas deals with the supposed non-Hamas factions that are bombing Israel? If you can’t then I suggest you move on, because I’m not interested in playing your word chess. Just let me know when you have a point.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 3:36 PM

America loves a winner!

Riverlove -

Quote:
But they're real good at blowing up civilian infrastructure from supersonic sorties by the hundreds. Their strategy seems to be kill 500 women and kids for every Hamas leader killed

The the best of my knowledge, 70-80% of the initial 400 Pals killed were those in uniform. I don't know here you get your info, but , as i understand it, the U.N. itself was offering the #'s of dead as being mostly soldiers and armed ( insurgents, terrorist, freedom fighters, what ever )

Listen, I'll say this one last time. HAMAS TARGETS INNOCENT CIVILIANS, ISRAELIS DO NOT! Why there are so many civilians killed in Gaza by Israeli ordinance is very simple. Hamas hides in homes and apartment buildings, and Israel has no choice BUT to shoot there. That's why we have the ground war, so there is a higher % of militants targeted over civilians in Gaza.

Dream - The info I get is that Hamas has been raining rockets down on Israel since day 1 after Israel gave what Hamas wanted.....to get out of Gaza. Israel is the victim here, by EVERY POSSIBLE ANGLE you want to approach this from. Folks say the rockets are in " retaliation " to Israel blockading Gaza. WRONG. Israel is blockading Gaza BECAUSE OF THE ROCKET ATTACKS! This is no chicken or the egg scenario, which is what the biased media from the Arabs wants the world to think. As I understand it, 6000 + rockets have been fired @ Israel in the past 3 YEARS ALONE !!

Now , this is the KEY point - IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE THAT ISRAEL HAS STATE OF THE ART WEAPONRY, THEY ARE NOT THE AGGRESSORS HERE, THEY DID NOT START THIS INFRACTION. You aim a bow and arrow at my wife or children's head, I don't give a fuck how far away you are, I'm gonna come back at you with a machine gun. I have EVERY right, as does Israel, to protect her people.

That's how I see it. Israel is there, they're not going anywhere, they'd prefer to live in peace w/ their neighbors, but if not, they are in their full right to defend themselves.

HAMAS BROKE THE CEASE FIRE HERE, not Israel

If Israel wanted to carpet bomb or wipe Gaza clean of Palestinians, they'd have done so long, LONG ago. There is no merit, none what so ever in the claims that Israel wants to eliminate the Pals. Even tonight, Hamas, has stated they will NOT stop, which leaves Israel zero options, but to advance and conquer.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 3:43 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"Show me where Hamas deals with the supposed non-Hamas factions that are bombing Israel?"

Show me that that it's Hamas. Then we can talk.

BTW, you STILL have a question to answer.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 3:47 PM

Mike

Thank you. My apologies for doing what I oughtn't which is to respond promptly, and without due time to allow things to cool. Had I done so, Finn might have had a better response, or I might've. But those were, at the moment, my thoughts exactly.

Wulf

Quote:
Our country should not be involved AT ALL in this conflict. Let them hash it out.

Alas, the voice of reason raises its head once more. Don't you realize that we now live in the age of stupidity? :)

Finn,

Without mutual respect there is no dialogue, so reading this is pointless. Do yourself a favor and don't waste your time reading mine.

For the record, I already laidout a detailed analysis of why I defend the defender, including when it is Israel. Also, for the record, the only thing that will get more jews killed is war. Not peace with Palestine.

Also, your insults to me, my intelligence, and your acclaimed facts of your invented fantasy world do not offend me, as I said, I'm almost impossible to offend. You have, however, succeeded.

My father's entire extended family was murdered in the holocaust. They were rounded up by the Nazis, and killed in a variety of unpleasant ways. Some were jews, and some were not, my ancestry as I said is largely celt, but my father had had only surviving family on the czech-german side. My father was alive at the time, and still is, and is alone in his family because of it.

The added insult is that you have indicated that you are in no way connected to the holocaust, but a military strategist who wished to use Israel for military gain. This is despicable.

My father and his mother, being not jewish, could flee, and were sent to America. Those who remained did so because either they were jewish, or because they had committed themselves to fight fascism from the German govt. in which they served, and fight it they did to the bitter end, until their entire families down to the last remaining infant were killed.

And, for those who care, when it came to rounding people up and putting them in camps, the Nazis did not care who was jewish and who was not. But don't take my word for it, ask any Serb, or Gypsy for that matter, since Gypsies are also aryans. No, all that mattered was that you were in the way.

Oh, and what do I see in the people of Gaza? Do I see an imminent threat to the people of the world both jewish and non? No. I see that they are in the way. And do I think that the jewish people of the world are behind this push? No, I don't have to guess, I know the answer to this, every poll states it. Not even the people of Israel are behind it. This attack plan was put together by military minds safe back in the US, often pretending to be in Jerusalem, but sometimes there or in Tel Aviv.

I hate to pull the holocaust card, which is why I haven't done so until now, but you force my hand. I was trying to give you ample opportunity to tell me in what way you were not in the position of being an unmitigated bigot and anti-semite. Now I have my answer. All the semites on the front lines, let 'em kill each other? that's pretty much the plan then?

BTW, I'm capable of seeing outside of exact repetitions to analogous and parallel situations. I'm not surprised someone who is not can also not apply firefly logic to the situation, as in Reavers, Alliance, and Blue Sun.

Rue, I think the word's you're looking for are "Final Solution."

And yes, I think Finn is jonesing for one. Actually, I think he might just have found one to do in both sides.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 4:25 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

'Rue, I think the words you're looking for are "Final Solution."'

Yes, those were the words.

I would still like to see a reporter ask the question, b/c it does seem like it's Israel's intent.

In general, after many studies, some researchers have determined that the only way to get lasting peace between two warring parties is when both sides conclude they cannot win.

Obviously Israel thinks it can win, and as for the Palestinians, since they are overmatched and bound to lose, they have nothing to lose by fighting.

Israel used to have a policy of 10 for 1, apparently it's moved up to 300 or 400 (or more) for 1. If your 'enemy' (the Palestinians) thinks you will kill them anyway, why NOT fight ? Combine both those approaches and you get extermination.

Should Israel lose US support, the equation would change. Israel would suddenly realize it's a very small country surrounded by a sea of Muslim countries. Who knew ? It might start trying to live with its neighbors rather than pound them into the dust, assuming, of course, its neighbors would be willing to let bygones be bygones. Or maybe they would settle for 1000 for 1.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 4:54 PM

Quote:

I did answer it. I think that’s your real problem. Where are the rogue factions bombing Canada? Or Mexico?

Have you been anywhere near the Texas/Mexico border lately? There's murder aplenty on both sides of the border, and it's escalating. This is due to drug wars, which we supposed are keeping under control and in check.

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 4:57 PM

Quote:
Hamas hides in homes and apartment buildings, and Israel has no choice BUT to shoot there.

Ergo, they ARE targeting innocent civilians. They're launching attacks with full knowledge that innocent civilians are going to die.

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 5:00 PM

Quote:
You aim a bow and arrow at my wife or children's head, I don't give a fuck how far away you are, I'm gonna come back at you with a machine gun. I have EVERY right...

Actually, in this hypothetical, you don't. The above act would make YOU the felon in this instance. I'll leave it to you to figure out why.

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 5:10 PM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
Hamas hides in homes and apartment buildings, and Israel has no choice BUT to shoot there.

Ergo, they ARE targeting innocent civilians. They're launching attacks with full knowledge that innocent civilians are going to die.

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

The civilians are going to die anyways. If they run, the Pals will kill them. If they don't, then the Pals can continue raining rockets on Israeli positions. In a time of war, the hard, cold choice has to be made, regardless. There is NO 'targeting ' of civilians by the Israelis, despite your juggling of the situation.

( dunno why you posted another reply, butI'll answer anways )

The bow/arrow scenario , as you understand, was merely to show that the level of disparity in weapons between Hamas and Israel has been used, by some, as some sort of an 'excuse' for why Israel should be held accountable, and Hamas should not. Pure B.S.. Even with far inferior armament, Hamas is targeting women,children, civilian parts of town, KNOWING DAMN WELL THERE ARE NO Israeli uniformed soliders or equipment in those areas. THAT IS BLATENT TERRORISM. There's no way around it, andt there is absolutely ZERO Quid Pro Quo , despite some claims, goin on here when Israel fires back.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 5:12 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"If they run, the Pals will kill them."

Really ? Is this another one of your endless stream of 'facts' ?

PS - seeing as you don't know this - the rockets being launched into Israel are extremely primitive (no guidance or steering systems) and are probably not good to more than +/- 25 miles in any direction. It's hard to say they are 'targeting' anyone. Further, they are non-explosive. And finally, HOW many Israelis have been killed by these rockets ? 300 ? 400 ? Maybe 5 ? Do you even know ?

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 5:26 PM

Quote:

RUE

In general, after many studies, some researchers have determined that the only way to get lasting peace between two warring parties is when both sides conclude they cannot win.

Obviously Israel thinks it can win, and as for the Palestinians, since they are overmatched and bound to lose, they have nothing to lose by fighting.

That pretty much sums it up. Of course, the positioning of Israel was only partly religious. Britain wanted a beachhead colony in the area, and after WWII, we took over. There were issues that no one in the west was taking jews, and they failed to look into random options like Africa.

There is a weird historical superstition in the hierarchy of zionism, though. The name of course comes from Mt. Zion, the place to which the original followers of Jehovah came from Sinai, which was their original local. Jewish and Christian prophesy calls for the final battle to be at a third mountain, Har Megiddo, aka Armageddon. More battles have taken place at Armageddon than anywhere else, largely this is coincidence, because the middle east has always been hotly contested territory.

Note the amount of military action in Israel around these three mountains, though:

The territory claimed by the extension of the border and building of the fence was largely Meggido and the surrounding area, not much else was claimed. Also, there have been countless attempts to recapture Zion itself, and the whole of Jerusalem, Historically, Jerusalem, to the best of my knowledge, and I've done a ton of research, was never the capital of Israel. The ancient capital of Israel was where Tel Aviv now stands. There really isn't credible evidence that they ever controlled Gaza. Much of the imperial ambitions come from a document called the United Kingdom of David, which surfaced around 400BC and was proven to be a forgery by the Talmudic scholars around 200BC.

And, of course, most notably, one extremely notable attempt of Israel to recapture Sinai itself. According to the original mythos, Jehovah lived in Sinai itself. The idea that he lived in the sky came from Elohim, which was the rival faith of Israel. Notice it's is ra el, and not israyhwh. Literally, "To serve God" but that god being El, of Elohim, from Ellil, from the Assyrian Enlil.

This is why I miss Antimason, he was the person on this forum I could actually have discussions like this with. I don't know if anyone else has studied this stuff. Of course, this whole subject causes problems in Israel, because the Zionists want to move the capital to Jerusalem, the traditional capital of Judah, and if you've read the old testament, and the treatment of the people of Israel by the kings of Judah, then you can kind of get where this is an issue.

I had the Knesset confused with the religious courts, Finn was right about that. I had just read an article about them. I'm not up on the internal politics of Israel, just what I hear from jewish people over here. I'm not up on politics of Palestine. I know that they had democratic elections and Hamas won. They would not have won if Israel had taken a more peaceful stance at the time. Hamas had a pretty low approval rating before the aggressive jewish settlement programs, another pet peeve of many jews: Poor jews are encouraged to immigrate to Israel, then given small city apts. There is a homesteading act where they can resettle to Palestinian territories, and so many opt to do so, much like the Irish in Indian lands here. But, probably then as now, these people are really being put on the front lines and probably considered expendable by the govt. Then, if they get attacked, it's makes for an incident to spark a military offensive.

I have no idea what Finn's stake in this is, and at this point I officially don't care.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 5:38 PM

Auraptor,

Finn blew his chance, but I'm offering you a chance to retract this remark

Quote:
diaper heads

It's extremely reminiscent of the term sh*tskin which appears on the Nazi forums to refer to blacks. Please, be polite and call them "sand n*ggers" if that's how you feel.

You've been reasonable since I've come back, and so I was somewhat taken aback by this sort of what I'd call "genocidally racist rhetoric." If you want to reword that and argue for a more logical position, I'm willing to listen.

(I'm skipping Finn's posts from now on. He's a well educated bigot, but still a total waste of my time.)

On the other issue "Hamas" used to target Israeli civilians, this is true. Presently, I think random palestinians do, but the govt. does not. They're not suicidal, and like the Israelis, they think the Israelis will win in a war, so they want peace.

If Israel wins this war it is going to be devastating for Israel. It could lead us into a WWIII. maybe this is why MIC types are jonesing for it. Bigger contracts. Big old stupid greed. Let me know if I'm wrong.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 5:52 PM