NationStates Jolt Archive

I don't know if white flags can in fact shoot down an aircraft, but the French are acting kind of funny...as they always do...when it comes to Israel.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20061020/wl_mideast_afp/mideastconflictlebanon


French Defense Minister Michele Alliot-Marie warned that Israeli air violations in Lebanon were "extremely dangerous" and must end in the interest of all parties.

French President Jacques Chirac, speaking from Finland where he was attending a European Union summit, also urged Israel to stop violating Lebanon's air space.

Alliot-Marie spoke to reporters after holding talks with UN chief Kofi Annan and Jean-Marie Guehenno, the French head of the UN peacekeeping operations, that focused on the Israeli intrusions into Lebanese air space.

"These violations are extremely dangerous because they may be felt as hostile by forces of the coalition that could be brought to retaliate in case of self-defense and it would be a very serious incident," the French minister said.

She was reacting to a suggestion made here Thursday by the commander of UN troops in Lebanon, French General Alain Pellegrini, that the rules of engagement for his forces might have to be changed to allow the use of force to stop the Israeli air violations.

"If the diplomatic means should not be enough, maybe it could be considered other ways," Pellegrini added, referring to the possible use of anti-aircraft missiles by French forces in Lebanon.

But he noted that such a move would require "new rules of engagement drafted and decided here (at UN headquarters)".

He insisted that the Israeli air violations were a "clear violation" of Security Council resolution 1701 which ended the month-long war between Israel and Hezbollah guerrillas in southern Lebanon in August.

That resolution also called for the disarming of Hezbollah guerrillas and the withdrawal of Israeli troops from southern Lebanon.

Speaking on the sidelines of the EU summit in Lahti, in southern Finland, Chirac said: "I note that we strongly would like resolution 1701 to be applied in the letter and the spirit and that Israeli air force flights over Lebanon (are) against the spirit and the letter of 1701."

"One way or another this resolution has to be applied," the French president said, while declining to comment on Pellegrini's remarks.

Alliot-Marie for her part said she was told during a videoconference with the UNIFIL headquarters in the southern Lebanese town of Naqura Friday that the Israeli air violations had stopped over the past 48 hours.

And she stressed that the ground-to-air missiles protecting the French contingent in the UN mission in Lebanon (UNIFIL) were exclusively for self-defense.

The minister also noted that the Israeli air incursions made that resolution 1701 "more fragile" because they could be used by some people -- an apparent reference to Hezbollah -- as a "pretext" not to abide by their obligations under the resolution.

"This is the reason why it is necessary that these violations stop now," Alliot-Marie said. "So far the (French) ground-to-air missiles are only meant for self-protection and self-defense and will not be used in a different fashion."

She expressed hope that Israel could be convinced through diplomatic channels that violating Lebanese air space "is against its own interest" and is "counter-productive."

But Mark Regev, the Israeli foreign minustry spokesman, retorted Friday that his country had fulfilled its key obligations under resolution 1701.

"Three weeks ago our forces pulled out of Lebanon, and we have implemented our most important obligations under UN resolution 1701," he said. "But every objective person should recognize that is far from the case concerning the Lebanese and their obligations."

"Contrary to resolution 1701, two Israeli soldiers kidnapped by Hezbollah haven't been freed, Hezbollah's military infrastructure south of the Litani river has not been dismantled, and Hezbollah's rearming continues," he said.

"Apparently it is simpler to make new demands on Israel, and we deplore that," Regev told AFP.

.

Those wascally Fwench.

I find your post funny. It's the Americans that cut and ran from Lebanon after being attacked, not the French. They stuck around ;)

I find your post funny. It's the Americans that cut and ran from Lebanon after being attacked, not the French. They stuck around ;)

yes actually they did. That was the wrong move on Reagans part. The French in general though...

Ha ha France challenging the best trained army in the world thats hillarious!!

Uh-oh, my France Bash sense is tingling...

Ha ha France challenging the best trained army in the world thats hillarious!!

you realize that france could, if it wanted to, nearly destroy the united states, right?

Ha ha France challenging the best trained army in the world thats hillarious!!

hezbollah kicked the shit out of them, so my money is on the french foregn legion.

the IDF are very brave against stone throwing kids, but this is a different league.

you realize that france could, if it wanted to, nearly destroy the united states, right?

And the US that remained...would totally destroy France (waves Old Glory).

I assume that you mean with nukes...yes, nukes could destroy the US. But I really don't feel threatened by the French. Although I am admittedly biased.

you realize that france could, if it wanted to, nearly destroy the united states, right?

yes, with the ever so devastating "snooty remark" they have an endless supply of. :p

you realize that france could, if it wanted to, nearly destroy the united states, right?

France would beat Israel in a big ol' fight.

hezbollah kicked the shit out of them, so my money is on the french foregn legion.

the IDF are very brave against stone throwing kids, but this is a different league.


Hezbollah did what now? I agree that the Israeli leaders certainly flinched more than they should have...but i fail to see how they got the **** kicked out of them.

hezbollah kicked the shit out of them, so my money is on the french foregn legion.

the IDF are very brave against stone throwing kids, but this is a different league.

Yep, when it comes to kicking the crap out of third world countries, they're up there with the Yanks. No lebanese schoolgirl would stand a chance against the formidable skill of the IDF sniper. Thats why they're a "shining light" in the mid-east.

Hezbollah did what now? I agree that the Israeli leaders certainly flinched more than they should have...but i fail to see how they got the **** kicked out of them.

did israel win? or did they withdraw after losing a battleship and heavy casualtues all the while Hez fired more and more rockets?

i repeat, if a rag tag bunch of part-time militia men can give them a bloody nose, what would the french paras and foreign legion do with air support?

the IDF is most certainly not the force it used to be. could you see them pulling off the entebbe raid today?

did israel win? or did they withdraw after losing a battleship and heavy casualtues all the while Hez fired more and more rockets?

i repeat, if a rag tag bunch of part-time militia men can give them a bloody nose, what would the french paras and foreign legion do with air support?

the IDF is most certainly not the force it used to be. could you see them pulling off the entebbe raid today?

Not to mention the fact that if France invaded Israel all the arab nations in the region would join their side....

And the US that remained...would totally destroy France (waves Old Glory).

I assume that you mean with nukes...yes, nukes could destroy the US. But I really don't feel threatened by the French. Although I am admittedly biased.

that's exactly what I meant yes...and of course france (and most of europe likely) would be obliterated in the process.

But the french government is entirely capable of crippling, perhaps permanently, the US.

did israel win? or did they withdraw after losing a battleship and heavy casualtues all the while Hez fired more and more rockets?

The ship was damaged, not destroyed. It's likely been repaired. Israel withdrew because it wanted to, I am quite certain that if israel really, REALLY wanted to, there'd be a white flag with a blue star flying over beirut right now.

Not to mention the fact that if France invaded Israel all the arab nations in the region would join their side....

i presume the french peace keepers simply want to be able to engage whoever threatens them impartially. whether that be hezbollah fighters or an IDF jet. and they are militalrily more than capable of mixing it with the IDF.

i repeat, if a rag tag bunch of part-time militia men can give them a bloody nose, what would the french paras and foreign legion do with air support?
Maybe because Israel was showing restraint?
The struggle against Hezbollah was not "Win or Die", and so, the Israelis didn't go in with anywhere near their full capacity, as Hezbollah was probably hoping they would.
On the other hand, a French assault may well tempt the Israelis to start playing with their nuclear stockpiles.

Israel withdrew because it wanted to, I am quite certain that if israel really, REALLY wanted to, there'd be a white flag with a blue star flying over beirut right now.
Well, it was domestic pressure as much as international. They could certainly put a blue star on the top of the Beirut parliament - but at home all hell would be breaking lose.

Don't forget that this war didn't go too well for the IDF at all - apart from the casualties and the little success in stopping the missiles, there were organisational problems. Returning reservists are all over the newspapers with the stories about conflicting orders, food and water not coming in so they ended up looting Lebanese homes and so on. Many Israelis are royally pissed off.

i presume the french peace keepers simply want to be able to engage whoever threatens them impartially.
Exactly.

Let's remind ourselves why they're there: They're there to keep Hezbollah away from Israel, and Israel away from Lebanon.
If Hezbollah wants to send fighters or weapons into that area, the peacekeepers will stop them. If the IDF sends planes into the area, I damn well expect the peacekeepers to do something about that.

The Israeli pilots should be happy they didn't get a radar lock-on to greet them (actually, did the peacekeepers take air defense stuff with them?). If Hezbollah had planes, I'd imagine that would have happened ages ago.

Ha ha France challenging the best trained army in the world thats hillarious!!

You, my friend, are not an informed person.

Do you know what Israel’s navy is? Not good.

France's navy? Quite good.

France has aircraft carriers, they have good aircraft (as does Israel, I know), France has a well-equipped army and, of course, the Foreign Legion!

France has plenty of money, Israel spends its cash on riot shields to defend against small children.

Israel’s army is, admittedly, very experienced. However, most of their experience comes from their anti-insurgency stuff, and not real combat.

In the six-day war, ground battles were not major, and extremely cast in the favor of the Israelis. They had established air-superiority early, something they could not do against a nation like France.

France vs. Israel = France.

did israel win? or did they withdraw after losing a battleship ...

Battleship?! Israel does NOT have battleships...

yes, with the ever so devastating "snooty remark" they have an endless supply of. :p
In the current America-France series of verbal football matches, the US commentators (like you) are invariably the more arrogant.

Battleship?! Israel does NOT have battleships...

frigate, cruiser, whatever. a navy boat that got taken out of the war.

by a type of missile mossad didnt think hezbollah had.

frigate, cruiser, whatever. a navy boat that got taken out of the war.

by a type of missile mossad didnt think hezbollah had.

Israel operates thirteen "Missile Craft", all of which are different variants of small destroyer and frigate classes.

A destroyer was hit by the missile, which was Iranian. Yes, nobody knew they had one of those.

did israel win? or did they withdraw after losing a battleship and heavy casualtues all the while Hez fired more and more rockets?

i repeat, if a rag tag bunch of part-time militia men can give them a bloody nose, what would the french paras and foreign legion do with air support?

the IDF is most certainly not the force it used to be. could you see them pulling off the entebbe raid today?


what are you talking about? Israel did not "lose". The only problem Israel had was they didn't seem to put everything they got into the conflict. They did not want to have to invade Lebanon, and it showed. They flinched. If Israel wanted to, they could have steamrolled into southern lebanon, rounded up every single insurgent, and executed them. But they did not want to do it. Hezbollah shot off old fashioned rockets at civilian populations, hoping it would hit something of importance. they couldn't even aim the rockets with any accuracy. and the missile fired at the battleship...that is evidence of Iranian support.

Hezbollah hid behind human shields and fired rockets from the 1960s. They were lucky Israel was so reluctant to send a ground force in. The Israeli leadership, the politicians, were the weak ones, not the army.

and yes, Israel would absolutely demolish France if a war broke out.

frigate, cruiser, whatever. a navy boat that got taken out of the war.
It was a missile boat (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sa%27ar_5-class_missile_boat). These things and a few U-Boats (from Germany - and they've been getting them almost for free...that just on the side for the guys that say Europe doesn't support Israel) form the Israeli Navy.

It got hit because its radars and air defense systems interfered with IDF jets overhead. So they turned it off, which may not have been such a great idea. I like that story because it illustrates that shit happens in war, regardless of how fancy your technology is.

by a type of missile mossad didnt think hezbollah had.
Well, Hezbollah doesn't. Iran does, and they sent the things (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-802) over to Lebanon for Hezbollah to use.

In the current America-France series of verbal football matches, the US commentators (like you) are invariably the more arrogant.

yes and in the next football draft you should pick up a sense of humor. ;)

what are you talking about? Israel did not "lose". The only problem Israel had was they didn't seem to put everything they got into the conflict. They did not want to have to invade Lebanon, and it showed. They flinched. If Israel wanted to, they could have steamrolled into southern lebanon, rounded up every single insurgent, and executed them. But they did not want to do it. Hezbollah shot off old fashioned rockets at civilian populations, hoping it would something of importance. they couldn't even aim the rockets properly. and the missile fired at the battleship...that is evidence of Iranian support.

Hezbollah hid behind human shields and fired rockets from the 1960s. They were lucky Israel was so reluctant to send a ground force in. The Israeli leadership, the politicians, were the weak ones, not the army.

and yes, Israel would absolutely demolish France if a war broke out.

so even when israel fails in its stated goals of destroying hezbollah and stopping the missile attacks, they won? :rolleyes:

no-one is suggesting a war will break out, just that if the French decide to engage the IDF if they break the terms of the ceasefire again, they would be more than capable of doing so.

the IDF have clearly moved away from conventional warfare into counter insurgency work as their primary role. as NL said, there were basic failings of logistics and command and contraol, something the foreign legion would not have.

you krazy yanks have to use your head here not an emptional knee jerk anti-french response. if they couldnt dent hezbollahs ability to fire rockets, why are you so sure they would beat a well trained modern army with air and naval response who have experience in the area?

The Israeli leadership, the politicians, were the weak ones, not the army.
Dude, not even the Israelis themselves are making up Dolchstoß crap right now. The Army Generals were the ones who marched into Olmert's office proclaiming they could destroy Hezbollah and free the soldiers.

Turns out they couldn't. The politicians believed them and didn't tell the military what the deal was. Both are at fault.

http://www.upi.com/InternationalIntelligence/view.php?StoryID=20060821-040035-9815r
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5282548.stm
http://www.shunpiking.com/ol0306/0306-NA-HTZ-0815-idflogis.htm
http://www.zeit.de/online/2006/35/Israel

and yes, Israel would absolutely demolish France if a war broke out.
How? They couldn't get there. Not even their planes would have the range - and if they did, they'd be outnumbered and outgunned.

France could just sit in the mediterranean and wait, grinding the IDF to pieces slowly. And because Israel ultimately is still a small country (and would be occupied by the various extremists at its borders who'd seize this opportunity), they'd run out after a while.

yes and in the next football draft you should pick up a sense of humor. ;)
I have yet to see a conservative make a funny anti-French joke. And most of the diatribes aren't expressed like jokes. It's flat-out hatred.

How? They couldn't get there. Not even their planes would have the range - and if they did, they'd be outnumbered and outgunned.

France could just sit in the mediterranean and wait, grinding the IDF to pieces slowly. And because Israel ultimately is still a small country (and would be occupied by the various extremists at its borders who'd seize this opportunity), they'd run out after a while.

this is assuming the french actually did shoot down an Israeli aircraft and the fighting broke out around Lebanon between the two nations.

I have yet to see a conservative make a funny anti-French joke. And most of the diatribes aren't expressed like jokes. It's flat-out hatred.


what i said was completely light hearted. you just personally found it offensive and therefore unfunny.

here's another one:

French gun for sale, never fired and only dropped once!

this is assuming the french actually did shoot down an Israeli aircraft and the fighting broke out around Lebanon between the two nations.
France isn't ever going to fight a war against Israel. Consider the large number of Jews in France, and the trade between the two. Also, French politics consistently remain on the right-wing which seems to mean pro-israel these days.

I'd have to say the remarks from the french were more a reminder of national sovereignty to the Israelis, not a declaration of hostility

France isn't ever going to fight a war against Israel. Consider the large number of Jews in France, and the trade between the two. Also, French politics consistently remain on the right-wing which seems to mean pro-israel these days.

Most French Jews were killed during the Holocaust-the French were more than eager to hand them over, by the way. France has a very small Jewish population, and even these Jews are leaving because of the violence and attacks they receive from some Muslims.

Also, the right-wing parties are anti-Israel.

Everyone hates the Jews. Don't you know that by now?

Everyone, that is, except most conservatives, a few assorted liberals, and George Bush.

France has a very small Jewish population, and even these Jews are leaving because of the violence and attacks they receive from some Muslims.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4753348.stm

Anyways - French soldiers will not want to shoot at Israeli soldiers. The two countries are friends afterall. But at the same time the French (and all the other countries involved in this peacekeeping mission) take this operation quite seriously. It is perfectly understandable that they don't want to see one side violating the neutral airspace.

And considering that neither the Israeli politicians nor the IDF could find the domestic support to start anything fresh right now...the IDF will probably stop with the fly-overs for a while, and that'll be it.

you realize that france could, if it wanted to, nearly destroy the united states, right?

Yes, they could destroy the entire "freedom fry" sector of the economy.

Everyone hates the Jews. Don't you know that by now?

Everyone, that is, except most conservatives, a few assorted liberals, and George Bush.

Well, King George III likes Israel for all the wrong reasons. He only wants Israel to exist not as a safe-haven, but because he believes that Israel as to be Jewish for the "second-coming" to occur.

We Californians don't take the Apocolypse very seriously; we know it already happened in Texas.

As someone told me they saw on a bumper-sticker near the beach: After the Rapture, can I have your car?

Most French Jews were killed during the Holocaust-the French were more than eager to hand them over, by the way. France has a very small Jewish population, and even these Jews are leaving because of the violence and attacks they receive from some Muslims.

Also, the right-wing parties are anti-Israel.
.

that is profound ignorance.

france has the third largest jewish population in the world. they are not leaving. remember when sharon invited all the french jews to emigrate to israel and the cheif rabbi of france told him to keep the noise down?

that is profound ignorance.

france has the third largest jewish population in the world. they are not leaving. remember when sharon invited all the french jews to emigrate to israel and the cheif rabbi of france told him to keep the noise down?

So its Jewish population is right behind Israel? Or is Israel behind France?

so even when israel fails in its stated goals of destroying hezbollah and stopping the missile attacks, they won? :rolleyes:

no-one is suggesting a war will break out, just that if the French decide to engage the IDF if they break the terms of the ceasefire again, they would be more than capable of doing so.

the IDF have clearly moved away from conventional warfare into counter insurgency work as their primary role. as NL said, there were basic failings of logistics and command and contraol, something the foreign legion would not have.

you krazy yanks have to use your head here not an emptional knee jerk anti-french response. if they couldnt dent hezbollahs ability to fire rockets, why are you so sure they would beat a well trained modern army with air and naval response who have experience in the area?

krazy yank? knee jerk anti-french response? hardly. The french army is not formidable.

besides what about the history of the french army?

Just for fun, type in "French Military Victories" at Google, see what comes up. :D

and off the top of my head i know of the french throwing up the white flags during the Gallic Wars, the dutch war, war of spanish succession, franco-prussian war, WWI (they were secretly about to surrender), WWII, War in Indochina, Algeria (where the french were brutal and still lost) and more recently their fumbling around in the Ivory Coast. They also originally only pledged 200, 200!, troops to the peacekeeping force in Lebanon but changed their tune when Italy was about to step up to the plate. the French are just unreliable.

French Incompetence and Brutality in the Ivory Coast (http://www.marxist.com/Africa/ivory_coast_intervention.htm)


oh and check this site out... heh heh...

http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/text/france.html

- Gallic Wars
- Lost. In a war whose ending foreshadows the next 2000 years of French history, France is conquered by of all things, an Italian. [Or at ths time in history, a Roman -ed.]

- Hundred Years War
- Mostly lost, saved at last by female schizophrenic who inadvertently creates The First Rule of French Warfare; "France's armies are victorious only when not led by a Frenchman." Sainted.

- Italian Wars
- Lost. France becomes the first and only country to ever lose two wars when fighting Italians.

- Wars of Religion
- France goes 0-5-4 against the Huguenots

- Thirty Years War
- France is technically not a participant, but manages to get invaded anyway. Claims a tie on the basis that eventually the other participants started ignoring her.

- War of Revolution
- Tied. Frenchmen take to wearing red flowerpots as chapeaux.

- The Dutch War
- Tied

- War of the Augsburg League/King William's War/French and Indian War
- Lost, but claimed as a tie. Three ties in a row induces deluded Frogophiles the world over to label the period as the height of French military power.

- War of the Spanish Succession
- Lost. The War also gave the French their first taste of a Marlborough, which they have loved every since.

- American Revolution
- In a move that will become quite familiar to future Americans, France claims a win even though the English colonists saw far more action. This is later known as "de Gaulle Syndrome", and leads to the Second Rule of French Warfare; "France only wins when America does most of the fighting."

- French Revolution
- Won, primarily due the fact that the opponent was also French.

- The Napoleonic Wars
- Lost. Temporary victories (remember the First Rule!) due to leadership of a Corsican, who ended up being no match for a British footwear designer.

- The Franco-Prussian War
- Lost. Germany first plays the role of drunk Frat boy to France's ugly girl home alone on a Saturday night.

- World War I
- Tied and on the way to losing, France is saved by the United States [Entering the war late -ed.]. Thousands of French women find out what it's like to not only sleep with a winner, but one who doesn't call her "Fraulein." Sadly, widespread use of condoms by American forces forestalls any improvement in the French bloodline.

- World War II
- Lost. Conquered French liberated by the United States and Britain just as they finish learning the Horst Wessel Song.

- War in Indochina
- Lost. French forces plead sickness; take to bed with the Dien Bien Flu

- Algerian Rebellion
- Lost. Loss marks the first defeat of a western army by a Non-Turkic Muslim force since the Crusades, and produces the First Rule of Muslim Warfare; "We can always beat the French." This rule is identical to the First Rules of the Italians, Russians, Germans, English, Dutch, Spanish, Vietnamese and Esquimaux.

- War on Terrorism
- France, keeping in mind its recent history, surrenders to Germans and Muslims just to be safe. Attempts to surrender to Vietnamese ambassador fail after he takes refuge in a McDonald's.

The question for any country silly enough to count on the French should not be "Can we count on the French?", but rather "How long until France collapses?"

"Going to war without France is like going deer hunting without an accordion. All you do is leave behind a lot of noisy baggage."

Or, better still, the quote from last week's Wall Street Journal: "They're there when they need you."



With only an hour and a half of research, Jonathan Duczkowski provided the following losses:

Norse invasions, 841-911.
After having their way with the French for 70 years, the Norse are bribed by a French King named Charles the Simple (really!) who gave them Normandy in return for peace. Normans proceed to become just about the only positive military bonus in France's [favour] for next 500 years.

Mexico, 1863-1864.
France attempts to take advantage of Mexico's weakness following its thorough thrashing by the U.S. 20 years earlier ("Halls of Montezuma"). Not surprisingly, the only unit to distinguish itself is the French Foreign Legion (consisting of, by definition, non-Frenchmen). Booted out of the country a little over a year after arrival.

Panama jungles 1881-1890.
No one but nature to fight, France still loses; canal is eventually built by the U.S. 1904-1914.

Napoleonic Wars.
Should be noted that the Grand Armee was largely (~%50) composed of non-Frenchmen after 1804 or so. Mainly disgruntled minorities and anti-monarchists. Not surprisingly, these performed better than the French on many occasions.

Haiti, 1791-1804.
French defeated by rebellion after sacrificing 4,000 Poles to yellow fever. Shows another rule of French warfare; when in doubt, send an ally.

India, 1673-1813.
British were far more charming than French, ended up victors. Therefore the British are well known for their tea, and the French for their whine (er, wine...). Ensures 200 years of bad teeth in England.

Barbary Wars, middle ages-1830.
Pirates in North Africa continually harass European shipping in Meditteranean. France's solution: pay them to leave us alone. America's solution: kick their asses ("the Shores of Tripoli"). [America's] first overseas victories, won 1801-1815.

1798-1801, Quasi-War with U.S.
French privateers (semi-legal pirates) attack U.S. shipping. U.S. fights France at sea for 3 years; French eventually cave; sets precedent for next 200 years of Franco-American relations.

Moors in Spain, late 700s-early 800s.
Even with Charlemagne leading them against an enemy living in a hostile land, French are unable to make much progress. Hide behind Pyrennes until the modern day.

French-on-French losses (probably should be counted as victories too, just to be fair):

1208: Albigenses Crusade, French massacared by French.
When asked how to differentiate a heretic from the faithful, response was "Kill them all. God will know His own." Lesson: French are badasses when fighting unarmed men, women and children.

St. Bartholomew Day Massacre, August 24, 1572.
Once again, French-on-French slaughter.

Third Crusade.
Philip Augustus of France throws hissy-fit, leaves Crusade for Richard the Lion Heart to finish.

Seventh Crusade.
St. Louis of France leads Crusade to Egypt. Resoundingly crushed.

[Eighth] Crusade.
St. Louis back in action, this time in Tunis. See Seventh Crusade.

Also should be noted that France attempted to hide behind the Maginot line, sticking their head in the sand and pretending that the Germans would enter France that way. By doing so, the Germans would have been breaking with their traditional route of invading France, entering through Belgium (Napoleonic Wars, Franco-Prussian War, World War I, etc.). French ignored this though, and put all their effort into these defenses.

Thomas Whiteley has submitted this addition to me:

Seven year War 1756-1763
Lost: after getting hammered by Frederick the Great of Prussia (yep, the Germans again) at Rossbach, the French were held off for the remainder of the War by Frederick of Brunswick and a hodge-podge army including some Brits. War also saw France kicked out of Canada (Wolfe at Quebec) and India (Clive at Plassey).

Richard Mann, an American in France wants to add the following:

The French consider the departure of the French from Algeria in 1962-63, after 130 years on colonialism, as a French victory and especially consider C. de Gaulle as a hero for 'leading' said victory over the unwilling French public who were very much against the departure. This ended their colonialism. About 2 million ungrateful Algerians lost their lives in this shoddy affair.

I don't know if white flags can in fact shoot down an aircraft, but the French are acting kind of funny...as they always do...when it comes to Israel.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20061020/wl_mideast_afp/mideastconflictlebanon




Those wascally Fwench.


WOw good for them...they are peacekeepers and take it seriously...wow



Viva La France !

So its Jewish population is right behind Israel? Or is Israel behind France?

http://pewglobal.org/reports/pdf/253topline.pdf
http://superfrenchie.com/?p=125
http://www.crif.org/?page=accueil/main&uselang=eng

that is profound ignorance.

france has the third largest jewish population in the world. they are not leaving. remember when sharon invited all the french jews to emigrate to israel and the cheif rabbi of france told him to keep the noise down?

Dreyfuss


read it.


Vichy ...

Read about it...

Bad vibes with the Jew dude s..... La belle France has.

Most French Jews were killed during the Holocaust-the French were more than eager to hand them over, by the way. France has a very small Jewish population, and even these Jews are leaving because of the violence and attacks they receive from some Muslims.

Also, the right-wing parties are anti-Israel.

Everyone hates the Jews. Don't you know that by now?

Everyone, that is, except most conservatives, a few assorted liberals, and George Bush.
Everything in this post is wrong. France has the fourth largest Jewish population in the world.

Most people in the west do not hate the Jews. Everyone accepts them except neo-Nazis.

that is profound ignorance.

france has the third largest jewish population in the world. they are not leaving. remember when sharon invited all the french jews to emigrate to israel and the cheif rabbi of france told him to keep the noise down?

There are 600,000 Jews in France-barely 1% of the entire population. By comparison, Israel has 5 million Jews. Learn your statistics.

No, I don't remember any such thing happening, although if it did, would you be willing to uproot yourself to a completely different country and culture just because you happen to be of the religion that is the state religion of that country?

I really don't understand what your point is, by the way, other than to tell me I have "profound ignorance."

The french army is not formidable.
:rolleyes:
Inform yourself, mate. It's the strongest on the continent, and certainly capable of giving the Brits a run for their money.

And besides, what's the point of this discussion? Anyone seriously into military matters will tell you that the French military can kick arse if necessary, and you won't listen and instead use nerd trolling websites and internet mythology to "disprove" that. Won't bring the thread forward.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4753348.stm

Anyways - French soldiers will not want to shoot at Israeli soldiers. The two countries are friends afterall. But at the same time the French (and all the other countries involved in this peacekeeping mission) take this operation quite seriously. It is perfectly understandable that they don't want to see one side violating the neutral airspace.

And considering that neither the Israeli politicians nor the IDF could find the domestic support to start anything fresh right now...the IDF will probably stop with the fly-overs for a while, and that'll be it.

:p

The French hate Israel. They're fake friends. The kind that will stab each other in the back and smile at each other afterwards.

Of course, when Hezbollah is being vigorously re-armed with state-of-the art Iranian missiles, you can't blame Israel for not upholding its side of the ceasefire.

Or is it a ceasefire only if Israel does it?

The French hate Israel. They're fake friends. The kind that will stab each other in the back and smile at each other afterwards.
You read link:
http://pewglobal.org/reports/pdf/253topline.pdf
http://superfrenchie.com/?p=125

Of course, when Hezbollah is being vigorously re-armed with state-of-the art Iranian missiles, you can't blame Israel for not upholding its side of the ceasefire.
Is it? Or are you just making shit up right now?

Dreyfuss


read it.


Vichy ...

Read about it...

Bad vibes with the Jew dude s..... La belle France has.

dreyfuss was when? 1907? exonerated and buried with full military honours. the vichey were all shot after the war.

im not denying that there were incidents of anti-semitism in france, like there are in the US, but to say the french jewish poulation is under attack from muslims and they are leaving is inflammatory and wrong.

There are 600,000 Jews in France-barely 1% of the entire population. By comparison, Israel has 5 million Jews. Learn your statistics.

No, I don't remember any such thing happening, although if it did, would you be willing to uproot yourself to a completely different country and culture just because you happen to be of the religion that is the state religion of that country?

I really don't understand what your point is, by the way, other than to tell me I have "profound ignorance."

600,000 is still the third largest jewish population in the world.

you were the one who claimed they were leaving!!

back up your claim that they are attacked by muslims and leaving france.

otherwise its just blah blah frenchie bashing.

:rolleyes:
Inform yourself, mate. It's the strongest on the continent, and certainly capable of giving the Brits a run for their money.

And besides, what's the point of this discussion? Anyone seriously into military matters will tell you that the French military can kick arse if necessary, and you won't listen and instead use nerd trolling websites and internet mythology to "disprove" that. Won't bring the thread forward.


ok, first of all, most thinking people do not have much faith in the French military. you may get all offended, but it's the damn truth. They have not had the best track record as of late; not since their brutality in Algeria and eventual loss. you may not like it, but it is the truth so deal with it and don't accuse me of using "nerd trolling websites". The French Army sends shivers down nobody's spine.

They initially didn't even offer much help in the Lebanon peacekeeping effort until Italy stepped up. Not wanting to be outdone by Italy, for the sake of pride, they finally stepped up.

But if people want to say foolish things like France could cripple America or easily dispose of the Israeli army, I have to speak up because only on Nation States would this ever be said. The French Army, because it is a western nation, has considerable power, yets; but it is not in the same league as America, Britain, Israel, China and probably would have difficulty with N. Korea even. Nukes aside. India and Pakistan are no slouches either when compared with france.

Now I am routing for France to be effective in Lebanon, I want them to succeed...but they just don't have the best track record. go ahead and get as steamed as you want, it is the damn truth.

also, alot of the sites i quoted were in good fun, so relax. it's not like Americans aren't ever the target of jokes.

haha, its nice to see Daemonocracy trolling the forums to spout his ridiculous arguements, again.

I'll keep it short and sweet: Daemonocracy bases his notions of the French army on a collection of jokes made whiny republicans and bumbling democrats (generally speaking, even the liberals like to make fun of the french, unless the conservatives are doing it too). He has as much knowledge of warfare as a hippy, with vague notions of what war costs and no idea how it is waged. He probably even thought (or thinks) that Iraq was a swell idea. This guy is a chicken-hawk, no more, no less, and if he's not then he's just playing devil's advocate.

I will admit that he makes for good entertainment, though. He's like a funny little right-wing clown.

600 000 is the 3rd? i find that nearly impossible to believe.

israel and america are higher, and ill bet the soviet union is as well

that's exactly what I meant yes...and of course france (and most of europe likely) would be obliterated in the process.

But the french government is entirely capable of crippling, perhaps permanently, the US.

"Crippling, perhaps permanently, the US."

Would you care to elaborate how ?? Freedom Fry economy jokes aside, I just don't see how. Granted, it could be my American Superiority Complex.

An honestly curious question. I'll wait for an answer.

:rolleyes:
Inform yourself, mate. It's the strongest on the continent, and certainly capable of giving the Brits a run for their money.

And besides, what's the point of this discussion? Anyone seriously into military matters will tell you that the French military can kick arse if necessary, and you won't listen and instead use nerd trolling websites and internet mythology to "disprove" that. Won't bring the thread forward.


I can vouch for you there....but its never the military its the idiots that use it that fuck up.

And that would be the FRENCH GOVERNMENT.

They are the culprits. most Americans that have trained with the French would gladly fight alongside them.

At Least every one in my family . And their freinds....but they are not the British ...never will be .

dreyfuss was when? 1907? exonerated and buried with full military honours. the vichey were all shot after the war.

im not denying that there were incidents of anti-semitism in france, like there are in the US, but to say the french jewish poulation is under attack from muslims and they are leaving is inflammatory and wrong.



If I was a true Samurai would fall on my sword ...but fuck that...

You are about 99.99 % right..

If anyone pays attention they know France tries its BEST to enforce secular values.

But They are STILL anti Semites at least as bad as those in the US .

ok, first of all, most thinking people do not have much faith in the French military.
Yeah, because the Rafale, Leclercs etc are all crap.

Now I am routing for France to be effective in Lebanon, I want them to succeed...but they just don't have the best track record. go ahead and get as steamed as you want, it is the damn truth.
They're not fighting insurgents here. They're doing peacekeeping, and at that they've actually been pretty good...indeed, of all the Western nations they have shown the greatest readiness to help out all over the world.

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

You read link:
http://pewglobal.org/reports/pdf/253topline.pdf
http://superfrenchie.com/?p=125


Is it? Or are you just making shit up right now?

The missile fired at the Israeli ship was an IRANIAN missile. The rockets they were firing were smuggled to them through Syria and from Iran. Are you denying the Iranian influence???

some essays/articles on alleged French anti-semitism:

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=14752

http://www.factsofisrael.com/blog/archives/000173.html

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3061349,00.html

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/348474899?ltl=1161394392

http://www.jewishsf.com/content/2-0-/module/displaystory/story_id/16033/edition_id/313/format/html/displaystory.html

there are many opinions on French-antisemitism. Historically France certain has a shady past when it comes to anti-semitism. But that is the past. Today I feel it is not so much anti-semitism but more of an anti-Israel stance. France frequently seems to want to pass some sort of resolution through the UN condemning Israel for something. It is absurd because if France were ever in Israels position of being surrounded by hostile neighbors, they would be just as aggressive in their tactics, if not more so. This could be seen in their recent actions in the Ivory Coast.

The only true Ally Israel has in the world is the USA. the only one. that is sad.

600 000 is the 3rd? i find that nearly impossible to believe.

israel and america are higher, and ill bet the soviet union is as well

Wiki agrees with me, and then disagrees with itself... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_population)

The only true Ally America has in the world is the USA. the only one. that is sad.

QFT!! Diamond idiocy.

The missile fired at the Israeli ship was an IRANIAN missile. The rockets they were firing were smuggled to them through Syria and from Iran. Are you denying the Iranian influence???
What? That was before the current peacekeeping force arrived! UNIFIL before that was pointless - it had no mandate and no one respected them enough. So they just sat back and had an extended holiday.

This time the troops are there for a serious reason. And that they would tell the IDF to respect the border lines illustrates that.

some essays/articles on alleged French anti-semitism.
Those are all opinion pieces, or news articles on potentially related issues (xenophobia and right-wing extremism =/= antisemitism).

Fact is that the French don't have a negative opinion of Jews, and that the Muslims in France are among the most sympathetic to Jews in the world at something like 79% with positive opinions.

haha, its nice to see Daemonocracy trolling the forums to spout his ridiculous arguements, again.

I'll keep it short and sweet: Daemonocracy bases his notions of the French army on a collection of jokes made whiny republicans and bumbling democrats (generally speaking, even the liberals like to make fun of the french, unless the conservatives are doing it too). He has as much knowledge of warfare as a hippy, with vague notions of what war costs and no idea how it is waged. He probably even thought (or thinks) that Iraq was a swell idea. This guy is a chicken-hawk, no more, no less, and if he's not then he's just playing devil's advocate.

I will admit that he makes for good entertainment, though. He's like a funny little right-wing clown.

LOL!

at any rate they are right up there

What? That was before the current peacekeeping force arrived! UNIFIL before that was pointless - it had no mandate and no one respected them enough. So they just sat back and had an extended holiday.

This time the troops are there for a serious reason. And that they would tell the IDF to respect the border lines illustrates that.


Those are all opinion pieces, or news articles on potentially related issues (xenophobia and right-wing extremism =/= antisemitism).

Fact is that the French don't have a negative opinion of Jews, and that the Muslims in France are among the most sympathetic to Jews in the world at something like 79% with positive opinions.

Ok, at first i thought you might be denying that missile was Iranian. and yes, hopefully the French led peacekeeping force can prevent any more Iranian arms from being smuggled into Lebanon. What would be really nice is if the French actually disarmed Hezbollah. This is what really needs to be done.

and as I stated before, I do not think France suffers from anti-semitism, but the government, or at least some top officials seem to have reservations about the nation of Israel.

Ummm chicken hawks are like that Folley guy...old dude looking for young boys / teens...

What are you implying here ?


Are you insulting someone because they made a good point or ?????

Granted, virtually the only French conflicts that I would have liked to see the French win either happened 2,000 years ago (don't just sit there starving, damn it, charge!) or against other Frenchmen in more recent centuries, but I do find it terribly impressive that, despite apparently getting into wars every five minutes and losing every single one, France has somehow managed to last a thousand years in -for much of that time- the middle of the world with a fairly large territory in local terms, and to hang-on to numerous over-seas posessions, one or two in strategically significant locations.

As for Israel... I just don't care. Israel is just deadly dull, to me, and if France and Israel ever kick-off on one another, I won't care until the communards rise again.

QFT!! Diamond idiocy.

ha ha, very funny. but its a typo, i meant Israel.

Yeah, because the Rafale, Leclercs etc are all crap.


They're not fighting insurgents here. They're doing peacekeeping, and at that they've actually been pretty good...indeed, of all the Western nations they have shown the greatest readiness to help out all over the world.

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

Someone should point out that the cease fire is not only holding but its working.


Just a small itty bitty fact I thought I could throw in .

This is what really needs to be done.
That's Lebanon's domestic matter. They said they would do it, but before they ask for help, the peacekeepers don't have the authority to intervene. They're there to stop new weapons from coming in, not make them give up the old ones.

and as I stated before, I do not think France suffers from anti-semitism, but the government, or at least some top officials seem to have reservations about the nation of Israel.
In practice the French have always attempted to keep a somewhat neutral approach to the matter.
There have been instances when this may have been carried too far, to the point where they treated the "bad guys" and the "good guys" like equals - but at the same time they therefore managed to stay popular enough not to have their diplomatic abilities in the middle east compromised, like the US.
I don't think there is an actual anti-Israeli agenda there at all.

That's Lebanon's domestic matter. They said they would do it, but before they ask for help, the peacekeepers don't have the authority to intervene. They're there to stop new weapons from coming in, not make them give up the old ones.


In practice the French have always attempted to keep a somewhat neutral approach to the matter.
There have been instances when this may have been carried too far, to the point where they treated the "bad guys" and the "good guys" like equals - but at the same time they therefore managed to stay popular enough not to have their diplomatic abilities in the middle east compromised, like the US.
I don't think there is an actual anti-Israeli agenda there at all.

That is just it though, they are more worried about compromising their image in the middle east. Israel needs unwavering support and if it was not for the US they would have been demolished a long time ago. The US takes alot of flak for their unilateral support of Israel, and other nations have every right to view it as favoritism, but the fact remains that without this policy 5 million Jews would be looking at real estate in the middle of the Mediterranean Sea.

From my P.O.V. it is not quite neutral but slanted against Israel. If Israel received more mutlilateral support, the US would not have to be so unilateral and Israel would not have to be so aggressive and militarized. They face suicide bombings on a consistant basis, yet when they build a wall to help protect them, France criticizes them. They bombed Iraq's Nuclear Reactor in the 1980s and France screamed their throats out at them, yet now we know it was the right thing to do. Many other instances such as this that lead me to believe that a decent number of French government officials seem to have a problem with Israel the country.

an actual anti-Israeli agenda there at all.


GET REAL :D


They do it because they know it gets them contracts for weapons ...BTW ...who ARMS the ARAB world second to thee RUSSIANS ???

Hmmmmm ???:D

They may not mean it...they are French after all,,,but who are you kidding...??

They deliberately side with th anti Israel lobby while they play with the Israeli's in secret like lovers .:D


Viva la France !!!!

You read link:
http://pewglobal.org/reports/pdf/253topline.pdf
http://superfrenchie.com/?p=125


Is it? Or are you just making shit up right now?

I said the French hate Israel, not Jews per se. Besides, after what happened to the Jews during the Holocaust, much fewer people who dislike Jews would be willing to admit it.

http://www.cfr.org/publication/11764/is_hezbollah_rearming.html

I said the French hate Israel, not Jews per se. Besides, after what happened to the Jews during the Holocaust, much fewer people who dislike Jews would be willing to admit it.

http://www.cfr.org/publication/11764/is_hezbollah_rearming.html



Stop that I thought I could make them work...you make it easy !

600,000 is still the third largest jewish population in the world.

you were the one who claimed they were leaving!!

back up your claim that they are attacked by muslims and leaving france.

otherwise its just blah blah frenchie bashing.

600,000 is still a very small number in population of 60 million.

I never said Muslims were attacking Jews. I said some Muslims were attacking Jews. Don't stereotype people.

Here's you link.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2004-11-22-jews-france_x.htm

Stop that I thought I could make them work...you make it easy !

I'm not quite sure what you're saying. Care to clarify?

600,000 is still a very small number in population of 60 million.

I never said Muslims were attacking Jews. I said some Muslims were attacking Jews. Don't stereotype people.

Here's you link.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2004-11-22-jews-france_x.htm


Hmmm seeems like you guys clash .

I find your post funny. It's the Americans that cut and ran from Lebanon after being attacked, not the French. They stuck around ;)


1. Im not too sure if America HAD armed forces in Lebanon

2. As far as I know, there are less than 200 French troops in Lebanon, AFTER the fighting. Le' Grande Army indeed. (If figures are differnt, please post the link)

1. Im not too sure if America HAD armed forces in Lebanon



He/She was talking about Beirut, Marines barracks, ca 1983. Reagan's mistake.

Pains me to say the Great One made a mistake. But He did.

That is just it though, they are more worried about compromising their image in the middle east. Israel needs unwavering support and if it was not for the US they would have been demolished a long time ago.
Not anymore. Today Israel does not need unwavering support, it can survive quite well without it.

On the other hand - what good are allies to Israel when those allies have absolutely zero influence in the region? Israel can defend itself militarily - what it can't do is use diplomacy effectively, and that's where it needs real help.

They face suicide bombings on a consistant basis, yet when they build a wall to help protect them, France criticizes them.
Everyone does, and not so much because of the fence - but because they are building it on Palestinian land! If they put the fence on their side of the Green Line, that would be just fine.

They bombed Iraq's Nuclear Reactor in the 1980s and France screamed their throats out at them, yet now we know it was the right thing to do.
The important word being "now". Then it was a largely unprovoked attack that could easily have escalated.

As far as I know, there are less than 200 French troops in Lebanon, AFTER the fighting. Le' Grande Army indeed. (If figures are differnt, please post the link)
Right now? About 2000 (with 13 tanks), plus about 1,700 sailors along the coast.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unifil#Reinforcements
http://www.opendemocracy.net/conflict-middle_east_politics/france_hesitation_3862.jsp

http://www.cfr.org/publication/11764/is_hezbollah_rearming.html
That is indeed an issue. The problem is however that UNIFIL is not deployed along Syria's border. Neither the French nor any other UN troops can stop Syrian trucks going into Lebanon - that's the job of the Syrians and the Lebanese.

Also, French politics consistently remain on the right-wing which seems to mean pro-israel...yes and yes.

1. Im not too sure if America HAD armed forces in Lebanonwe had.. and we runned away from Hezbollah.

Just after The President says we would not.

we had.. and we runned away from Hezbollah.

Just after The President says we would not.

I'm assuming that we're still talking about Reagan...

A lot of Israel's defence is French manufactured. They buy American and French planes/missiles etc.
But France are cowards and almost every other country knows it. They have a huge muslem population, most of which went on a riot last year and set fire to cars.

France would have a good crack at wiping out america if weirdness happened and it came to that, but the only force that has a chance of pulling that stunt is Britain because of the mobility of the submarine launched nuclear arsenal. Russia and China are too far away and would be intercepted.
But Britain would never do that anyway because it is secular and even the centre-right government they consider to be centre-left will always back the prevailing economy, which for the foreseeable future will be America.
India and China can pull statistics out of their asses that make them look strong, but any western citizen can still go there and buy an entourage for the price of a gallon of gasoline.

Israel withdrew because it wanted toyeah.. and I overpaid for my car because I really wanted to :rolleyes: I am quite certain that if israel really, REALLY wanted to, there'd be a white flag with a blue star flying over beirut right now....

OK.. thats what I want as a x-mas present.. I want the Israel soldiers to keep a Jewish flag on the Lebanese Parliament (congress).. I really truly want to see that.

...wiping out america ...

the only force that has a chance of pulling that stunt is Britain because of the mobility of the submarine launched nuclear arsenal. Russia and China are too far away and would be intercepted.China cannot Destroy "America".. and Britain can..

But you are wrong about Russia.. and yes.. France can.
BTW none of these Countries would do that.. unless we attack them first.

Yea so some of you think that France could do what exactly?
A country that got the shit kicked out of twice in the last century, who surrendered after their precious Paris was attacked, or soon to be invaded.
And some of you drunk cheese eating sodds think that France could pose
serious harm to The United States? What are they going to do, stop selling drugs, wine and cheese? Guess what folks we make our own! France only had nuclear weapons because someone cried on our shoulders. It was either we gave them the bomb or the Soviets, the Communists are gone. There is no threat from the Kremlin. France has returned to just another joke nation, the
ass of the worlds jokes. And gay sex, we all know France is the capital of
that too.
Well that's about all my rant has to say...

my brother brings up a good point, France hires other nations citizens
to fight for them. There own people don't acctualy do any fighting.
Sad affair...

China cannot Destroy "America".. and Britain can..

But you are wrong about Russia.. and yes.. France can.
BTW none of these Countries would do that.. unless we attack them first.

I'm not sure what you mean.
I think you are saying we shouldn't underestimate Russia. And I guess you are right, if they fired like 583573573 missiles at once, we would all be fucked.

And yeah, none of the nuclear nations will attack the US just now. Unless some rogue state gets in on it like Iran and Korea. Pakistan are a bit worrisome, but thankfully they only have sort of scud missile type ordnance which was designed and only capable to hurt India. If only they turned it on afghanistan.

the foreign legion isnt the whole of the french army


lawd

my brother brings up a good point, France hires other nations citizens
to fight for them. There own people don't acctualy do any fighting.
Sad affair...Your brother?
???

Daemonocracy, you can say all the rhetoric you want, but without anything to back up your claims, their pointless. Lets look at what would likely happen if France and Israel got into a fight.

1. French navy attacks the Israeli navy. The Israeli navy, with little to no combat experience, and being very small and weak, would be either sunk or forced into its ports, not to fight. Either way, there's no way the israeli's could take on the French navy.

2. Aerial combat. Israel has some alright SAM's, but they aren't going to take out Sea Skua's flying right over the ground, or french aircraft from the range they would fire them. The French have soldiers who actually have combat experience(Desert storm and balkans), while the israeli's basically have practice bombing undefended areas.

The French ships would be able to take out most aerial assaults against them. French pilots flying Rafale's would mop up the israeli F-15's, who would be equipped with less capable air to air missiles, much larger radar signatures on them, and probably no AWACS, as opposed to ones on the CDG. Even easier to take out the F-16's and other aircraft. Mirage 2000's would likely be able to do bombing runs with refueling over the mediterranean.

With the israeli airforce being unable to effectively stop the french, and the navy doing even worse, the French could easily establish a beachhead, and invade. The Israeli army is hardly made to fight conventional forces. French armoured forces would mop up the merkava's and any other armour the israeli's could muster. The French would have numerical superiority in armour, artillery, helicopters, etc.

Israel wouldn't be able to match France in a war. France has numerical superiority, technological superiority in most areas, much greater war industry, much greater military spending for that matter. Israel can do great against crappy militaries that most middle eastern nations have(at least, the ones above saudi arabia). However, it doesn't have the power to conventionally fight a power like France.

And about nukes, even if Israel made the hugely idiotic move to use them(which France could easily retaliate against, and obliterate israel), the israeli's would have to fly the nukes over to France. Even if the israeli planes somehow made it across the mediterranean, passing french ships, etc, they would be able to hit the southern coast of france, at best. Any further, Mirage 2000's would take out the israeli planes before they got to any major cities further inland than marseilles.

I'm not sure what you mean.
I think you are saying we shouldn't underestimate Russia. And I guess you are right, if they fired like 583573573 missiles at once, we would all be fucked. 583573573 missiles??

all they need is to be able to land 100-150 nukes.. If they destroy the 100 largest US metropolitan areas.. then the economy is destroyed.. America would go from "Super Power" to "handicaped beggar "

only 3 or 4 countries can do that
And yeah, none of the nuclear nations will attack the US just now.No Country will launch a missile attack targeting The US Mainland.. unless we attack them first.

my brother brings up a good point, France hires other nations citizens
to fight for them. There own people don't acctualy do any fighting.
Sad affair...
Yeah... most Western nations do that. Especially for more technological advanced military matters. The US uses a lot of them in Iraq.

The OP must be an American. Israel, as usual, is breaking international law, but it's the French who are in the wrong. I think they should just shoot down the planes and then ask questions.

But France are cowards and almost every other country knows it. They have a huge muslem population, most of which went on a riot last year and set fire to cars.


And gay sex, we all know France is the capital of that too.


my brother brings up a good point, France hires other nations citizens
to fight for them. There own people don't acctualy do any fighting.
Sad affair...

My god, such ignorance is hilarious!

Military expenditure:

France $45 billion (US) (FY06)
Israel $9.45 billion (US) (FY05)

Yep. Israel would totally pawn France. :rolleyes:

Dreyfuss


read it.


Vichy ...

Read about it...

Bad vibes with the Jew dude s..... La belle France has.
Hey! I read that some blacks in the USA were lynched by racists 60 years ago.
Using your logic, this 'proves' that all Americans living today are racist arseholes, doesn't it?

Well if no one is going to disarm Hezbollah then they have no excuse for whining about Israel flying planes.

They do their job I bet Israel would stop.

did israel win? or did they withdraw after losing a battleship and heavy casualtues all the while Hez fired more and more rockets?

i repeat, if a rag tag bunch of part-time militia men can give them a bloody nose, what would the french paras and foreign legion do with air support?


Battleship? BATTLESHIP? WWII is over. And did it really sink?

It would be easier to fight the French though, they have clear units and in a conventional battle would get their asses kicked, Against a bunch of pussies that hide amoungst civilians, yeah Israel could have won in Lebanon... At the cost of the majority of the population. You think 700 was bad if they had just stopped caring it would have made at least 2000 because they would have just bombed every building in South Lebanon.

He/She was talking about Beirut, Marines barracks, ca 1983. Reagan's mistake.

Pains me to say the Great One made a mistake. But He did.
Not like the Iran-Contra was a mistake now, was it? :rolleyes:

Dreyfuss

read it.

Vichy ...

Read about it...

Bad vibes with the Jew dude s..... La belle France has.

Oh, please. You've picked up a few words here and there, meshed them together, and convinced yourself you actually know something about Judaism in France. Not to mention that your sketchy tatters of knowledge are a tad bit outdated. How pathetic.

Funny how my two best friends, who both happen to be French Jews, don't feel these "bad vibes" you talk about. But then, hey. They're just French Jewish people. They don't know anything about the situation of French Jewish people, do they?

The missile fired at the Israeli ship was an IRANIAN missile. The rockets they were firing were smuggled to them through Syria and from Iran. .

And your point? Look at the amount of gear provided to the IDF by the Amerikans. The Israeli navys anti-beach picnic cruiser should have had its equipment on.....unless its only designed to pick up fishing boats under 40 foot....


The only true Ally Israel has in the world is the USA. the only one. that is sad.

You ever wonder why that is? Act like a colonising power and get treated like one.

Well if no one is going to disarm Hezbollah then they have no excuse for whining about Israel flying planes.

They do their job I bet Israel would stop.
Israel doesn't exactly have a reputation for restraint. I doubt your claims here.
Battleship? BATTLESHIP? WWII is over. And did it really sink?
And here's their major problem.

France have proper battleships, and aircraft carriers, as well as plenty of good frigates and destroyers, whereas Israel have fancy boats with a few cannons attached. They are utterly buggered if the French attack them by sea.

And I have no
It would be easier to fight the French though, they have clear units and in a conventional battle would get their asses kicked
Yeah, but that's the big problem of the IDF. It can't fight conventional armies.

Even Hezbollah was something of a challenge, basically because it was organised and had enough weapons and ammunition to keep its fight up.

Against some starving children with rocks in Palestine, it's an effective fighting force. Against anything resembling an army, they will be defeated, basically because the IDF isn't well-armed enough to fight them properly.

Against some men in a car, a Galil or an M4 is good enough. Against the French Foreign Legion in tanks or at the very least armoured cars, both of those weapons are completely useless, unless they're giving them DU bullets.
Against a bunch of pussies that hide amoungst civilians, yeah Israel could have won in Lebanon... At the cost of the majority of the population. You think 700 was bad if they had just stopped caring it would have made at least 2000 because they would have just bombed every building in South Lebanon.
Hezbollah was generally out of the towns and in bunkers, though. You'd just be needlessly killing civilians and hence creating more enemies.

And when the IDF tried shelling a whole town to the ground, they still repulsed the following assault quite nicely.

My summerization of this thread:

Anti-French + Anti-Americans +Anti-any other country = Idiots.

what i said was completely light hearted. you just personally found it offensive and therefore unfunny.

here's another one:

French gun for sale, never fired and only dropped once!

Wrong country. Check out the world's thinnest books and I think you'll find that's from Italian War Heros.

The book on Interesting Belgian's has only got a cover page. ;)

On a more serious note the issue is quite novel as it would seriously embarrass Der Shrubbenfuhrer and doubtless encourage Kindasleezy to make an even bigger fool of herself than she has done of late.

if france attacked israel and that resulted in israel attacking, i think all of europe should get involved, and wipe israel of the map. iran can help too.

I'm not sure what you mean.
I think you are saying we shouldn't underestimate Russia. And I guess you are right, if they fired like 583573573 missiles at once, we would all be fucked.

Look up Topol-M type ballistic missile. It is designed to evade all known forms of current ballistic interception including directed energy weapons.

Your brother?
???

It's probably a sad attempt at faking another account, without the trouble of setting up a new one to give himself more credibility.

France have proper battleships, and aircraft carriers, as well as plenty of good frigates and destroyers, whereas Israel have fancy boats with a few cannons attached. They are utterly buggered if the French attack them by sea. Plus Missile Corvettes, and subs. Can you stop saying "Battleship" it makes you look stupid. Battleships are obsolete.

Yeah, but that's the big problem of the IDF. It can't fight conventional armies.
Hezbollah isn't a conventional army, do they have tanks? Do they have aircraft? Do they fight in open combat in uniforms? As you said before they are a militia. Those are not professional armies.

The US can fight a professional Army, they can't fight 'some guys hiding in a cave somewhere', hence Iraq and Afghanastian. IDF is the same.

Even Hezbollah was something of a challenge, basically because it was organised and had enough weapons and ammunition to keep its fight up. Weapons that aren't even their's.

Against anything resembling an army, they will be defeated, basically because the IDF isn't well-armed enough to fight them properly.
The past wars with official armies disputes your claim,Six-day War, Yom Kipper war, Tanks Aircraft, etc, Israel whipped them.

Against some men in a car, a Galil or an M4 is good enough. Against the French Foreign Legion in tanks or at the very least armoured cars, both of those weapons are completely useless, unless they're giving them DU bullets. Of course 122mm shells would NEVER be used right? :rolleyes: I don't know where you get your information on Israel military but, pardon me, you know squat. Besides as I saw below this is all moot. If Israel was about to be destroyed they would simply launch and take their attackers with them.


And when the IDF tried shelling a whole town to the ground, they still repulsed the following assault quite nicely.
You mean they NEVER entered a single town in Lebanon during the war? Wait no they did, they didn't completely secure it but they weren't 'repulsed.'

if france attacked israel and that resulted in israel attacking, i think all of europe should get involved, and wipe israel of the map. iran can help too.

Lets hope you don't live in Europe or Iran... No most of the world then... Unless you like Nuclear wastelands... Israel has estimated around +100 Nukes, and whoever destroys them will get them as a parting gift.

Israel also has ballistic subs equped with nukes to use after Israel is wiped off the map to reach out and touch someone with .


But whats the point of this whole conversation ? France is doing a great job the cease fire is working and ...wtf are the complaints about ?

Wrong country. Check out the world's thinnest books and I think you'll find that's from Italian War Heros.

The book on Interesting Belgian's has only got a cover page. ;)

On a more serious note the issue is quite novel as it would seriously embarrass Der Shrubbenfuhrer and doubtless encourage Kindasleezy to make an even bigger fool of herself than she has done of late.

Remember the movie Airplane where the old lady wanted to read something "light" so the Flight Attendant hands her a pamphlet titled "Jewish Sports Legends"? :p

You ever wonder why that is? Act like a colonising power and get treated like one.

Israel a colonizing power? First of all, that land was Hebrew land to begin with, the Jews built Jerusalem and rebuilt it and fought for it for thousands of years. Israel would not have had to be formed if it was not for extreme anti-semitism all around Europe, Russia and elsewhere during WWII (and throughout history) and that little event known as the holocaust where millions of the Jewish people were slaughtered in a few years. Israel was and is their sancturary. They moved into what was originally their land and what had basically become a sparsely populated wasteland. They made that land liveable again but because of anti-semitism rearing its ugly face yet again they face constant hostilities from the muslim populations.

Israel has certainly been aggressive and used questionable tactics but for Gods sakes it seems every minute someone is trying to kill them when all they really want to do is be left alone and live in peace! And you have the nerve to call them a colonizing power? Either you are misinformed or you too are an anti-semite.

Even now, when Israel pulled out of Gaza and built multi million dollar Greenhouses for the Palestinians to use for their own benefit we see ignorant anti-semitism on the part of the Palestinian people. They looted and destroyed the Greenhouses which were there for their benefit and continue to fire rockets at Israel on a daily basis. Israel left! what more do they want? They want to kill the Jews, they want them gone, that is what they want. That is all they want. Not because they are a colonizing power, but because they are Jews! And because of decades of a corrupt government that has used the Jews as a scapegoat for their own corruption and incompetence.

Israel a colonizing power? First of all, that land was Hebrew land to begin with, the Jews built Jerusalem and rebuilt it and fought for it for thousands of years. .

My ancestors are/were indo-European. This was also a few thousand years ago. How much of a slice of the Punjab am I entitled to?


Israel would not have had to be formed if it was not for extreme anti-semitism all around Europe, Russia and elsewhere during WWII (and throughout history) and that little event known as the holocaust where millions of the Jewish people were slaughtered in a few years. Israel was and is their sancturary..

The persecution of Jews by others is therefore a licence for them to have somebody to persecute? And seeing as its "all around Europe" how does this justify setting up a miltary occupation in the middle east after the state of Israel has been established?


They moved into what was originally their land and what had basically become a sparsely populated wasteland. They made that land liveable again but because of anti-semitism rearing its ugly face yet again they face constant hostilities from the muslim populations...

I'm afraid you are rather misinformed. Having been essentially been betrayed on guarantees of independence by the British, the local Arab population became extremely alarmed at the numbers of zionist immigrants arriving and this led to violence. They did not arrive in a "sparsely populated wasteland" nor did they make "that land livable again" as they only owned 7% of it by 1947. The vast majority of land, and the vast majority of agricultural land(as well as attendant produce) was under Arab ownership.



Israel has certainly been aggressive and used questionable tactics but for Gods sakes it seems every minute someone is trying to kill them when all they really want to do is be left alone and live in peace! And you have the nerve to call them a colonizing power? ...

When one is trying to "live in peace" one does not build colonies of civillians, many of a fanaticl religous bent, outside ones own internationally recognised borders, at the expense of the native population. Thats colonisation. Nor does own have a two tier system of justice - one for the native and one for the settler. That too bespeaks of colonialism.


Either you are misinformed or you too are an anti-semite....

Or perhaps am rather more 'informed' than you. See above. And also below.



Even now, when Israel pulled out of Gaza and built multi million dollar Greenhouses for the Palestinians to use for their own benefit we see ignorant anti-semitism on the part of the Palestinian people. ....

Those greenhouses were not built for the Palestinians, but by the settlers. A mob of angry and foolish young men destroyed them, which was a rather stupid thing to do. However on raids into Gaza and in the West Bank, orchards, fields and greenhouses are frequently destroyed in a systematic way under orders by the IDF. This merits ne'er a mention.


They want to kill the Jews, they want them gone, that is what they want. That is all they want. Not because they are a colonizing power, but because they are Jews! And because of decades of a corrupt government that has used the Jews as a scapegoat for their own corruption and incompetence.

Have they left the West Bank? Have they left Arab East Jerusalem? Have they stopped settlement building? No, they have not. Colonisation.

But if people want to say foolish things like France could cripple America or easily dispose of the Israeli army, I have to speak up because only on Nation States would this ever be said. The French Army, because it is a western nation, has considerable power, yets; but it is not in the same league as America, Britain, Israel, China and probably would have difficulty with N. Korea even.
Of course France would have difficulty with Korea, sure America is having difficulty with Iraq.

Come on be honest what's your beef with France?

But They are STILL anti Semites at least as bad as those in the US .
One thing I dislike about conservatives is that it takes a holocaust for them to realise that discriminating against a minority is a bad thing.

there are many opinions on French-antisemitism. Historically France certain has a shady past when it comes to anti-semitism. But that is the past.
Historically France has been no more or less ant-semitic than the average western country. The Dreyfus affair illustrated that clearly. The holocaust changed everything of course and banished anti-semitism from everywhere but the extreme right.

France frequently seems to want to pass some sort of resolution through the UN condemning Israel for something.
Proof?

The only true Ally Israel has in the world is the USA. the only one. that is sad.
That's rubbish, do all countries have to donate billions a year to Israel to be true allies?

Israel has all of Europe behind it. As a European I can see that it is mainstream to criticise Israel, but denying its right to exist is not mainstream opinion.

That is just it though, they are more worried about compromising their image in the middle east. Israel needs unwavering support
France has closer contacts than most in Europe with Syria and Lebanon. "unwavering support" for Israel would damage those relationships and ultimately be detrimental in the road towards peace.

He/She was talking about Beirut, Marines barracks, ca 1983. Reagan's mistake.

Pains me to say the Great One made a mistake. But He did.
Heh, I thought only communists deified their leaders.

Ha ha France challenging the best trained army in the world thats hillarious!!

I'm sorry, but where was Switzerland mentioned?

The persecution of Jews by others is therefore a licence for them to have somebody to persecute? And seeing as its "all around Europe" how does this justify setting up a miltary occupation in the middle east after the state of Israel has been established?

Israel is the only liberal democracy in the Middle East. They should exist.

Israel a colonizing power? First of all, that land was Hebrew land to begin with, the Jews built Jerusalem and rebuilt it and fought for it for thousands of years.

Prove it. Perhaps the Bible tells you that (but it doesn't) and actual history and archaeology beg to differ.

Prove it. Perhaps the Bible tells you that (but it doesn't) and actual history and archaeology beg to differ.

To elaborate, the Bible is explicit that the ancient Hebrews came as a colonizing force. The original inhabitants were the Canaanites.

My ancestors are/were indo-European. This was also a few thousand years ago. How much of a slice of the Punjab am I entitled to?



The persecution of Jews by others is therefore a licence for them to have somebody to persecute? And seeing as its "all around Europe" how does this justify setting up a miltary occupation in the middle east after the state of Israel has been established?



I'm afraid you are rather misinformed. Having been essentially been betrayed on guarantees of independence by the British, the local Arab population became extremely alarmed at the numbers of zionist immigrants arriving and this led to violence. They did not arrive in a "sparsely populated wasteland" nor did they make "that land livable again" as they only owned 7% of it by 1947. The vast majority of land, and the vast majority of agricultural land(as well as attendant produce) was under Arab ownership.




When one is trying to "live in peace" one does not build colonies of civillians, many of a fanaticl religous bent, outside ones own internationally recognised borders, at the expense of the native population. Thats colonisation. Nor does own have a two tier system of justice - one for the native and one for the settler. That too bespeaks of colonialism.



Or perhaps am rather more 'informed' than you. See above. And also below.




Those greenhouses were not built for the Palestinians, but by the settlers. A mob of angry and foolish young men destroyed them, which was a rather stupid thing to do. However on raids into Gaza and in the West Bank, orchards, fields and greenhouses are frequently destroyed in a systematic way under orders by the IDF. This merits ne'er a mention.



Have they left the West Bank? Have they left Arab East Jerusalem? Have they stopped settlement building? No, they have not. Colonisation.

First of all, they are not persecuting anyone unless you are one of those "Zionst Conspiracy" theorists. They are a people who have returned to their original land and who wish to live freely and peacefully. That is all they want. Xenophobia, anti-semitism and intolerance is what lead to the violence we see today. The Jews built that land, they were there first and the arabs/muslims arrived around the 7th century A.D. If they could put aside their intolerance then they could both live peacefully but the 600,000 arabs living there could not tolerate the millions of Jews who suddenly moved in (back) and were dominating by numbers. British Imperialism also played a part (they didn't just promise palestinian independence but also a Jewish homeland within Palestine) but the simple fact is the Jews really had nowhere else to go after anti-semitism crystalized in Europe and Russia in the 1930s.

The reason for the "military occupation" is for protection. Settlements were set up to expand the borders of Israel to make them more defensible after war with multiple hostile Arab countries during the 6 day war. It is a military strategy and a necessary one due to the constant hostility and aggression they face. Egypt and Syria launched a near devastating surprise attack in 1973, increasing Israel's resolve to hold onto their settlements. Even now, after pulling out of Gaza, there are still Rockets being fired at Israel on a daily basis. They can't just leave it alone and you can't seem to see that. Sharon, who I always saw as a bit of a nut case was actually withdrawing toops and settlers from the occupied areas hoping that this may lead to some sort of peace process now that Arafat was dead. Well it doesn't look like it is happening with Gaza and now with Sharon in a Coma, Hamas elected to power and the recent conflict with Hezbollah who kidnapped Israeli troops, I doubt we'll see anyone pulling out of the West Bank anytime soon.

Look, I understand that there were in fact "Zionist" Jews who were quite aggressive and fought not only the Palestinians but the British as well. I know this, but Israel as a country is seen as a sanctuary for the Jewish people, especially after the Holocaust. in 1947 the U.N. voted to form 2 separate states, one Jewish (with a heck of alot less land than they have today) and one Arab, but the Arabs refused to accept this and a war broke out. 4 Arab states invaded the newly created state of Israel. The Arabs lost. They lost to Jewish Farmer-Soldiers who fought just as bravely as the Arabs but fought with more urgency because they had nowhere else to go. Usually when one side wins a war, they get to control the land.

And look what Israel has become. Look at Tel-Aviv and West Jerusalem. They are beautiful, even with all the turmoil Israel has and will go through, they have created a flourishing Democracy rich in culture and with a booming economy. In contrast, look at the surrounding Arab countries ruled by corrupt "Presidents", Kings and Dictators. This is another reason for the trouble we see today. The Arab street suffers while their leaders exploit them, but blame it on the "Zionists".

As for the Greenhouses, perhaps they were not built for the Palestinians, though I read otherwise, they certainly left the Greenhouses in Pristine condition for Palestinian use. You blame their destruction on mobs, well it seems that is all there is in Palestine is freaking mobs. Where is the law and order? there is none because of corrupt leaders and an exploitive government. As for your accusations about the IDF destroying greenhouses in the west bank during raids, usually when the IDF hits a target, it is because weapons or combatants are being hid there. The PLO and other groups often used civilian structures to hide their weapons and fighters. There may have indeed been intended malice but it is an undeniable fact that the terrorist groups use civilians and civilian structures as cover and storage houses.

Israel has tried to make peace. Arafat had repeatedly obstructed the process. The Oslo peace agreement which the Palestinians signed fell apart when Rabin was assassinated by some right wing nut in Israel and Hamas tried to capitalize on this situation. Because of Hamas' attacks, Netanyahu was elected and Netanyahu has no sympathy for the Palestinians so he reinforced settlements in the West Bank. The Israeli people though truly want peace and decided to elect Ehud Barak in 1999. Clinton mediated exhaustive talks between Barak and Arafat at Camp David but Arafat refused to cooperate. Barak offerd him so much and yet he still refused because Hamas was gaining influence and was questioning Arafats leadership and strength behind his back. Arafat was more concerned about his own position as leader than about the peace talks. I thought these PLO guys were suposed to be all about sacrifice? guess not in Arafats case who was just as corrupt as any Hamas terrorist. Ever since the failure of these talks the violence has been escalating.

Yet still, the people of Israeli wanted peace and supported Sharon in his effort to pull settlers from the West Bank and Gaza...but still the Palestinian "leaders" have obstructed the process. And now a terrorist organization is in power. With Hamas in power, their foreign policy will be one of anti-semitism and intolerance; exactly what lead to all this in the first place.

My ancestors are/were indo-European. This was also a few thousand years ago. How much of a slice of the Punjab am I entitled to? 2 feet of land I guess.



The persecution of Jews by others is therefore a licence for them to have somebody to persecute? And seeing as its "all around Europe" how does this justify setting up a miltary occupation in the middle east after the state of Israel has been established?
They persecute because they are afraid of them. They have yet to be proven wrong about being afraid of them. Every sucide bomber, every missile shot only digs their own graves.

I'm afraid you are rather misinformed. Having been essentially been betrayed on guarantees of independence by the British, the local Arab population became extremely alarmed at the numbers of zionist immigrants arriving and this led to violence. They did not arrive in a "sparsely populated wasteland" nor did they make "that land livable again" as they only owned 7% of it by 1947. The vast majority of land, and the vast majority of agricultural land(as well as attendant produce) was under Arab ownership. Despite tons of evidence to the contrary... So where is your proof?


When one is trying to "live in peace" one does not build colonies of civillians, many of a fanaticl religous bent, outside ones own internationally recognised borders, at the expense of the native population. Thats colonisation. Nor does own have a two tier system of justice - one for the native and one for the settler. That too bespeaks of colonialism. Weren't those recongized borders the pre 1967 ones right? Sorry but for trying to destroy Israel, the Arab nations DESERVED losing it as punishment.

Those greenhouses were not built for the Palestinians, but by the settlers. A mob of angry and foolish young men destroyed them, which was a rather stupid thing to do. Then they have no reason to complain.

However on raids into Gaza and in the West Bank, orchards, fields and greenhouses are frequently destroyed in a systematic way under orders by the IDF. This merits ne'er a mention.
And why did they do the raids?


Have they left the West Bank? Have they left Arab East Jerusalem? Have they stopped settlement building? No, they have not. Colonisation. Would it change anything? No

Prove it. Perhaps the Bible tells you that (but it doesn't) and actual history and archaeology beg to differ.


How about you prove that it was not. go ahead and prove it was not. Then i will present what I know.

How about you prove that it was not. go ahead and prove it was not. Then i will present what I know.

You made the assertion, so you prove it.

I sense a digression that's going to go nowhere good in a hurry.

Back to the OP... France is one of very few nations with a larger nuclear arsenal than Israel. They are, in fact, the ones that turned Israel into a nuclear power in the first place; they also have a substantial and well-equipped military by any objective standard.

There's nothing ridiculous about France demanding that Israel knock off and obey the UN resolution; in fact, they have a very good point. The UN resolution isn't worth the paper it is written on if Israel has free license to violate it.

I guess those ancient Israelis were the French of their time, since the area now known as Israel was ruled by the Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, and (briefly) Sassanians.

How about you prove that it was not. go ahead and prove it was not. Then i will present what I know.

The one making the positive assertion carries the burden of proof, as it is impossible to prove a negative. In debate, continued refusal to try and prove the positive assertion, while insisting that the opposing do the logically impossible is taken as an admission of defeat.

2 feet of land I guess.

So why is it different for me? Must I write my own holy book too?



They persecute because they are afraid of them. They have yet to be proven wrong about being afraid of them. Every sucide bomber, every missile shot only digs their own graves.

So afraid of them that they are building suburbs amongst them.....


Despite tons of evidence to the contrary... So where is your proof?
.

There was a survey carried out by the British and Americans for the UN. However seeing as you have "tons" of evidence I'd like to see what percentage you say it is. 1 or 2% either way is fine by me. Also you could just give the area in acres/dunums, I'm easy. Any year between 45 and 47.


Weren't those recongized borders the pre 1967 ones right? Sorry but for trying to destroy Israel, the Arab nations DESERVED losing it as punishment.
.

Really? Despite the fact that the areas were inhabited by the Palestinians expelled after the first Arab-Israeli war, you think they "DESERVED" being fucked over a second time round.....Thats great ....You can justify anything by that logic.


Then they have no reason to complain. .

Who said they were complaining? Nobody made any reference to this. Please try to read what we're talking about.


And why did they do the raids?.

Collective punishment. Grabbing land for settlers. Trying to crush resistance to the occupation.


Would it change anything? No

According to you, no.

So why is it different for me? Must I write my own holy book too? If you think it'll help go for it, in fact I'd lodge a demand to have those 2 feet of land, make a real Nodinia, have a seat on the UN council and get all the kickbacks.




So afraid of them that they are building suburbs amongst them.....
It's a middle finger to the ones they are fighting. As I have noted, you do crap to Israel, you lose land.


There was a survey carried out by the British and Americans for the UN. However seeing as you have "tons" of evidence I'd like to see what percentage you say it is. 1 or 2% either way is fine by me. Also you could just give the area in acres/dunums, I'm easy. Any year between 45 and 47.
I would but you'd claim every site I'd pull up is Pro-Zionist.

Really? Despite the fact that the areas were inhabited by the Palestinians expelled after the first Arab-Israeli war, you think they "DESERVED" being fucked over a second time round.....Thats great ....You can justify anything by that logic. The Southern Syrians have nothing but they're "Defenders" to blame. Sure if Israel had refused to fight back maybe.


But I will point out something I found, Israel is doing no diffferent now than what the Arabic nations thought in 1945-47. That Israel can not exist. Irony is sad at times.


Collective punishment. Grabbing land for settlers. Trying to crush resistance to the occupation.
One I can kind of see, two is just stupid again, Three, like I said the more violently they resist the more excuses Israel has to kill them.


According to you, no. According to peoples words... Such as lets say Iran's. "Israel should be wiped off the map" He didn't say return Israel to it's orginal borders he said Israel must die.
Look at the protesters in the streets when they shout do they shout. "Give us our land back?" No they shout "DEATH TO ISRAEL" So Israel responds with "You first".


By witnessing their religious fanaticism, and just using logic, you know there will be no peace as long as one side demands the death of everyone on the other side. Until then, the cycle continues. One side attacks, the other attacks back, so then they attack again, back and forth, back and forth, it'll never end. More death... Israels not going to stop avenging deaths... So who's the one who has to stop giving them reasons?

First of all, they are not persecuting anyone unless you are one of those "Zionst Conspiracy" theorists. .

Are you aware that the occupied territories exists under a state of martial law, and that the 4th geneva convention is officially and by order not recognised there?

Are you aware that in the rare cases a settler is prosecuted he will be brought back to Israel so he can be charged under Israeli civil law but a Palestinian faces a military court?


They are a people who have returned to their original land and who wish to live freely and peacefully. That is all they want. Xenophobia, anti-semitism and intolerance is what lead to the violence we see today. .

Then why are they building settlements outside their own borders in the occupied territories?


The Jews built that land, they were there first and the arabs/muslims arrived around the 7th century A.D. If they could put aside their intolerance then they could both live peacefully but the 600,000 arabs living there could not tolerate the millions of Jews who suddenly moved in (back) and were dominating by numbers. .

By 1950 they were only 50% of the population. I suggest you look it up.


British Imperialism also played a part (they didn't just promise palestinian independence but also a Jewish homeland within Palestine) but the simple fact is the Jews really had nowhere else to go after anti-semitism crystalized in Europe and Russia in the 1930s..

And that justifies a series of settlements begun in 1967 outside the state of Israel how?

The reason for the "military occupation" is for protection. Settlements were set up to expand the borders of Israel to make them more defensible after war with multiple hostile Arab countries during the 6 day war. ..

The border zone between north and south korea does not feature civillian suburbs as fortification. The military occupation is indeed for protection, but for the protection of civillian settlements rather than Israel itself. Tank traps and bunkers are protection, not three bedroom semi-detatched housing with a front and rear garden.


It is a military strategy and a necessary one due to the constant hostility and aggression they face. Egypt and Syria launched a near devastating surprise attack in 1973, increasing Israel's resolve to hold onto their settlements. ..

Which were of what use? Egypt has signed a peace treaty with Israel btw.


Even now, after pulling out of Gaza, there are still Rockets being fired at Israel on a daily basis. They can't just leave it alone and you can't seem to see that. Sharon, who I always saw as a bit of a nut case was actually withdrawing toops and settlers from the occupied areas hoping that this may lead to some sort of peace process now that Arafat was dead.
..

Sharon pulled out of Gaza because using 30,000 troops to protect 8,000 settlers was seen as a waste of resources that could be better used consolidating the West Bank and Arab East Jerusalem. He had no intention of negotiating according to his aide.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3720176.stm



And look what Israel has become. Look at Tel-Aviv and West Jerusalem. They are beautiful, even with all the turmoil Israel has and will go through, they have created a flourishing Democracy rich in culture and with a booming economy. ..

A democracy which does not extend to those in the occupied territories and is fundamentally flawed.


As for the Greenhouses, perhaps they were not built for the Palestinians, though I read otherwise,..

You can read much on the net. Not all of it is true.


they certainly left the Greenhouses in Pristine condition for Palestinian use. You blame their destruction on mobs, well it seems that is all there is in Palestine is freaking mobs. Where is the law and order? there is none because of corrupt leaders and an exploitive government. ,..

Their "government" was only recently recognised and when they elected a Government not to the taste of the West they cut off funding. As their borders are controlled by Israel they are thus trapped. After 40 odd years of military occupation, arrests, legal torture, confiscated land, destruction of schools, killings and week long curfews, they are indeed angry and thus may indeed constitute a "mob".


As for your accusations about the IDF destroying greenhouses in the west bank during raids, usually when the IDF hits a target, it is because weapons or combatants are being hid there. The PLO and other groups often used civilian structures to hide their weapons and fighters. There may have indeed been intended malice but it is an undeniable fact that the terrorist groups use civilians and civilian structures as cover and storage houses.,..

I'm sure that they do. However Israel practiced collective punishment so what was destroyed were not nessecarily being used. In fairness they usually did give the occupants 30 minutes to load their belongings and 2 or 3 generations of a family on to what transport they could find though, so obviously they aren't completely inhumane.

One wonders what was being stored in the petting zoo though, and why that didnt get shown to the media to prove how evil the arabs are.....and the Arab glasshouses...


Israel has tried to make peace. Arafat had repeatedly obstructed the process. The Oslo peace agreement which the Palestinians signed fell apart when Rabin was assassinated by some right wing nut in Israel and Hamas tried to capitalize on this situation. Because of Hamas' attacks, Netanyahu was elected and Netanyahu has no sympathy for the Palestinians so he reinforced settlements in the West Bank. The Israeli people though truly want peace and decided to elect Ehud Barak in 1999. Clinton mediated exhaustive talks between Barak and Arafat at Camp David but Arafat refused to cooperate. Barak offerd him so much and yet he still refused because Hamas was gaining influence and was questioning Arafats leadership and strength behind his back. Arafat was more concerned about his own position as leader than about the peace talks. I thought these PLO guys were suposed to be all about sacrifice? guess not in Arafats case who was just as corrupt as any Hamas terrorist. Ever since the failure of these talks the violence has been escalating..

Aha.....read this link please.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taba_summit

It's a middle finger to the ones they are fighting. As I have noted, you do crap to Israel, you lose land.?

So you build colonies amongst people that hate your guts on their land and fight them so they do crap so you can give them the middle finger. Maybe its the heat over there or the lack of heat over here that makes that a bit impenetrable to me...



I would but you'd claim every site I'd pull up is Pro-Zionist. .?

O fire away. I'll just argue on the numbers presented. No religous justifications though. I have some standards.


By witnessing their religious fanaticism, and just using logic, you know there will be no peace as long as one side demands the death of everyone on the other side. Until then, the cycle continues. One side attacks, the other attacks back, so then they attack again, back and forth, back and forth, it'll never end. More death... Israels not going to stop avenging deaths... So who's the one who has to stop giving them reasons?

And I still fail to see how that justifies building civillian colonies outside Israels borders.

The one making the positive assertion carries the burden of proof, as it is impossible to prove a negative. In debate, continued refusal to try and prove the positive assertion, while insisting that the opposing do the logically impossible is taken as an admission of defeat.

You sound like you're reading out of some tattered old college debate book.

No, if he does not believe something that I said, and believes it to be incorrect than he should prove it. It is a common tactic of obstruction on these boards where you don't agree with something or don't like the source you say "prove it", "it's wrong" and run away.

No, those who feel what I say is wrong...SHOULD PROVE MY ERROR if their argument truly has substance. Besides, how am I to prove something to someone who obviously does not want to believe it. I have seen this idiotic dance on these boards countless times.

I said what I know, prove me wrong. if you can.

oh and you're right, proving me wrong is "logically impossible".

You sound like you're reading out of some tattered old college debate book.

No, if he does not believe something that I said, and believes it to be incorrect than he should prove it. It is a common tactic of obstruction on these boards where you don't agree with something or don't like the source you say "prove it", "it's wrong" and run away.

No, those who feel what I say is wrong...SHOULD PROVE MY ERROR if their argument truly has substance. Besides, how am I to prove something to someone who obviously does not want to believe it. I have seen this idiotic dance on these boards countless times.

I said what I know, prove me wrong. if you can.

oh and you're right, proving me wrong is "logically impossible".

I have seen the light!

Israel is run by giant shapeshifting cockroaches. Prove me wrong.

I have seen the light!

Israel is run by giant shapeshifting cockroaches. Prove me wrong.

:rolleyes:

Prove my comment wrong Cthulhu. You can't can you?

You sound like you're reading out of some tattered old college debate book.

No, if he does not believe something that I said, and believes it to be incorrect than he should prove it. It is a common tactic of obstruction on these boards where you don't agree with something or don't like the source you say "prove it", "it's wrong" and run away.

No, those who feel what I say is wrong...SHOULD PROVE MY ERROR if their argument truly has substance. Besides, how am I to prove something to someone who obviously does not want to believe it. I have seen this idiotic dance on these boards countless times.

I said what I know, prove me wrong. if you can.

oh and you're right, proving me wrong is "logically impossible".

You don't have to prove a negative, it's a basic principle of logical arguement that the one making the positive statement has to back up said statement with proof.

:rolleyes:

Prove my comment wrong Cthulhu. You can't can you?

:rolleyes:

Prove my comment wrong Humans Are Crunchy. You can't can you?

Aha.....read this link please.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taba_summit

I'll get to the rest of what you wrote later but I have to go.

First I will say, please don't tell me i am debating this issue with someone referencing Wiki instead of their own learned knowledge. And if you think Wiki is all truth and fact then you need to learn more about that site.


Since beginning of the Al Aqsa intifada much blame has been placed on former President Yasser Arafat for the ending of the peace talks in 2000 at Camp David. He refused to give Israel 27% of the West Bank, with the rest fractured into multiple pieces, in exchange for Israel's promise that in 10 to 25 years Israel would eventually give 90% of the West Bank to the Palestinian authority (94% excluding greater Jerusalem) [8] [9]. What most Western commentators fail to add is that talks continued at the Taba Summit...

Right there in Bold. "What most Western Commentators..." this shows that whoever wrote that article is looking at it from their specific point of view. now this may make for interesting reading on different takes on the process, but it proves nothing. And no where on that article does it say why these "Western Commentators" blame Arafat for the failing of the talks nor does it address Arafat's own political problems at home where Hamas began questioning his strength as a leader while he was out getting photos with the Israeli leader. Wiki is not Britannica. The man or woman who wrote this had the intention of placing the blame on Barak as well as the Israeli Citizens whom he also mentioned as hurting the cause.

:rolleyes:

Prove my comment wrong Humans Are Crunchy. You can't can you?

Look at all the plastic people...without a care in the world...

Wiki is not Britannica.
You're right. It's not. Studies have conclusively demonstrated that, when it comes to validity, Wikipedia beats the Encyclopaedia Britannica.

Look at all the plastic people...without a care in the world...

Aw, I broke his brain.

You don't have to prove a negative, it's a basic principle of logical arguement that the one making the positive statement has to back up said statement with proof.


B.S. If you accuse someone of using a false or flawed source, then back up your skepticism.

B.S. If you accuse someone of using a false or flawed source, then back up your skepticism.

I agree. So prove to me that Israel isn't actually controlled by giant shapeshifting cockroaches.

Aw, I broke his brain.

niarb sih ekorb I ,wA

I agree. So prove to me that Israel isn't actually controlled by giant shapeshifting cockroaches.


Cthulhu: your argument is wrong is wong, and you must...OH MYGOD WHAT IS THAT!

Me: *looks around*

Cthulhu: *Running off into the distance*

niarb sih ekorb ,wA

Man, you can't even write something backwards correctly.

Man, you can't even write something backwards correctly.

que?

Cthulhu: your argument is wrong is wong, and you must...OH MYGOD WHAT IS THAT!

Me: *looks around*

Cthulhu: *Running off into the distance*

I see that you continue to evade the subject. Obviously you can't prove that Israel is not controlled by giant shapeshifting cockroaches.

Logical person: Hey, the IDF violated the UN Articles of War by directly targetting and killing civilians in the 2006 Israeli/Lebanon War.

Zi0nist: ZOMG holocaust denier!1!!11 eichman!!

B.S. If you accuse someone of using a false or flawed source, then back up your skepticism.

You didn't provide the source though.

Logical person: Hey, the IDF violated the UN Articles of War by directly targetting and killing civilians in the 2006 Israeli/Lebanon War.

Zi0nist: ZOMG holocaust denier!1!!11 eichman!!


Holocaust Denier : who cares if Hezbollah murders civilians as much as they can, or that they targeted civilians themselves in the war or that they instigated it all by kidnapping two soldiers from across the border and bringing the war to the Lebanese. Death To Israel!

I see that you continue to evade the subject. Obviously you can't prove that Israel is not controlled by giant shapeshifting cockroaches.


who says i disagree?

who says i disagree?

Who says I disagree?

Who says I disagree?

do you?

Not to mention the fact that if France invaded Israel all the arab nations in the region would join their side....

The United States would probably join on the side of Israel as well as most of the rest of Europe.

do you?

Do you?

Do you?

yes, i suspect they are controlled by shapeshifting cockroaches.

yes, i suspect they are controlled by shapeshifting cockroaches.
That would mean they could survive a nuclear Holocaust. So France has nothin' on them!!

That would mean they could survive a nuclear Holocaust. So France has nothin' on them!!


yes, this must be the Zionist conspiracy we always hear about!

yes, i suspect they are controlled by shapeshifting cockroaches.

And thus we have demonstrated that you are out of touch with reality, and thus are not a valid source as to the rules of debate.

And thus we have demonstrated that you are out of touch with reality, and thus are not a valid source as to the rules of debate.

considering how i agreed with your original theory, I guess that neither one of us would be a valid source

yes, this must be the Zionist conspiracy we always hear about!
And of course the United States government is directly controlled by jewish zionists and thus backs Israel in everything. (Sarcasm levels exceeding recommended amount)

considering how i agreed with your original theory, I guess that neither one of us would be a valid source

Except that was not my theory, rather a rehashing of the plot to Godzilla vs. Megalon, with Israel substituted for "an amusement park".

And of course the United States government is directly controlled by jewish zionists and thus backs Israel in everything. (Sarcasm levels exceeding recommended amount)


hey, you ever met an unsuccessful Jew? (checks sarcasm meter for warranty)

Except that was not my theory, rather a rehashing of the plot to Godzilla vs. Megalon, with Israel substituted for "an amusement park".


prove it

Except that was not my theory, rather a rehashing of the plot to Godzilla vs. Megalon, with Israel substituted for "an amusement park".

Considering you endorsed it repeatedly and disavowed all other theories, I would say its yours.

Considering you endorsed it repeatedly and disavowed all other theories, I would say its yours.

dumb theory anyway. I was always partial to King Kong. The 30s version. Good Stuff.

woop, its late...gotta go..

So you build colonies amongst people that hate your guts on their land and fight them so they do crap so you can give them the middle finger. Maybe its the heat over there or the lack of heat over here that makes that a bit impenetrable to me... That's my suspision, it's a thing of passive agression. If it was words I'd feel it was: "Not only did you fail to destroy us, Look we're EXPANDING now."



O fire away. I'll just argue on the numbers presented. No religous justifications though. I have some standards. I haven't read through it but I think some people beat me to it.



And I still fail to see how that justifies building civillian colonies outside Israels borders.
If you mean the 1967 borders. Those lands were "spoils of war" that was taken from the ones who started the war as punishment, the Southern Syrians lost those borders because of the stupidity of their allies. If the Arabs had won were they supposed to let Israel go? When you invade you seize land, if you counterattack and end up seizing land back, sucks to be the ones who started it. Saying that the victor should give back what they won is insane.

I guess the US colonies should have rejoined Britain at the end of the Revloutionary war. After all it was still 'theirs' right?:rolleyes:

If no one had invaded then those borders would stand as they were. They can't blame Israel, they should be blaming Syria, Egypt, and the others actions.

Considering you endorsed it repeatedly and disavowed all other theories, I would say its yours.

It's called reducio ad absurdum. Look it up.

Incidentally, I never once endorsed it or disavowed any other theories. I was very careful about that.

Holocaust Denier : who cares if Hezbollah murders civilians as much as they can, or that they targeted civilians themselves in the war or that they instigated it all by kidnapping two soldiers from across the border and bringing the war to the Lebanese. Death To Israel!

Wrong. Hezbollah isnt a state, therefore they are not part of the UN and not subject in particular to the Articles of War, no condoning of their tactics here buy seriously they dont have to play fair when their not a nation.

But on the other hand Israel is a state, and I think at this point it's pretty obvious they targetted civilians because they couldn't find enough militias to kill. Saying Hezbollah kills civilians is not a justification to the IDF for doing the same. I mean have you seen some of the images etc from Beirut and the like, entire high rise apartments leveled with noone but families in them, convoys of civilian cars trying to flee (and were given clearance by the IDF to leave) were subsequenctly bombed.

IDF military leaders (or politcal) need to be brought foward to the UN War Crimes Tribunal as far as I am concerned, you take the responsibility for being a state, you play by the rules. And on the topic of holocaust denying, if it happened in Europe, why must the Palestinians suffer on their own land?

I have seen the light!

Israel is run by giant shapeshifting cockroaches. Prove me wrong.

Obviously you can make illogical assumptions and completely disavow all other logical explainations. But you must have some kind of proof in order to make these type of statements. Since your statement is not backed by anything other than your word any evidence against such an idea would immediatly prove it wrong.

prove it

In Godzilla vs. Megalon, there was an amusement park controlled by giant shapeshifting cockroaches. I substituted Israel for amusement park in order to provide an intentionally ludicrous example as to why your standards were logically incorrect, by way of the debating technique known as reducio ad absurdum.

Wrong. Hezbollah isnt a state, therefore they are not part of the UN and not subject in particular to the Articles of War, no condoning of their tactics here buy seriously they dont have to play fair when their not a nation.

But on the other hand Israel is a state, and I think at this point it's pretty obvious they targetted civilians because they couldn't find enough militias to kill. Saying Hezbollah kills civilians is not a justification to the IDF for doing the same. I mean have you seen some of the images etc from Beirut and the like, entire high rise apartments leveled with noone but families in them, convoys of civilian cars trying to flee (and were given clearance by the IDF to leave) were subsequenctly bombed.

IDF military leaders (or politcal) need to be brought foward to the UN War Crimes Tribunal as far as I am concerned, you take the responsibility for being a state, you play by the rules. And on the topic of holocaust denying, if it happened in Europe, why must the Palestinians suffer on their own land?
why must jews be continiuely persecuted for existing? Why must Hezbollah create false propaganda that says jews eat babies for breakfest, lunch and dinner? Why do they have a continuel hostile attitude toward someone who wishes to live in peace? Why did they start the war in the first place? Why did the Hezbollah government allow thousands of sucide bombers over the border?

These are questions you fail to answer.

In Godzilla vs. Megalon, there was an amusement park controlled by giant shapeshifting cockroaches. I substituted Israel for amusement park in order to provide an intentionally ludicrous example as to why your standards were logically incorrect, by way of the debating technique known as reducio ad absurdum.
But obviously we have not seen that movie and cannot see it at this current moment. Therefore for all we know you could be spreading Zionist propaganda. (Sarcasm meter shatters into billions of tiny pieces)

dumb theory anyway. I was always partial to King Kong. The 30s version. Good Stuff.

woop, its late...gotta go..

Yea all Godzilla is, is an outsourcing of good American Monster labor to Asia.

But obviously we have not seen that movie and cannot see it at this current moment. Therefore for all we know you could be spreading Zionist propaganda. (Sarcasm meter shatters into billions of tiny pieces)

Yes you can, you have the interwebs so you can download it.

why must jews be continiuely persecuted for existing? Why must Hezbollah create false propaganda that says jews eat babies for breakfest, lunch and dinner? Why do they have a continuel hostile attitude toward someone who wishes to live in peace? Why did they start the war in the first place? Why did the Hezbollah government allow thousands of sucide bombers over the border?

These are questions you fail to answer.

Your failure to respond properly to my statement is an admittance that what I said was correct. War crimes are war crimes my friend, no matter how much you try to disguise them in words like 'national security'.

Your failure to respond properly to my statement is an admittance that what I said was correct. War crimes are war crimes my friend, no matter how much you try to disguise them in words like 'national security'.
I do not agree with Israel's management of Palestine but I also do not agree with your statements about Hezbollah not being a state, it is associated with Lebannon.

Hezbollah was also using the villages as a docking place for its soldiers, in a way using the people living there as living bodyarmor.

I do not agree with Israel's management of Palestine but do not agree with your statements about Hezbollah not being a state, it is associated with Lebennon

Well for one I think you need to define between Israeli and Jew, which I think is a major problem in this, saying Israel is 'The Home of all Jews' doesnt help either. And to answer your question, no one is persecuting the Jews for existing, some minorities are opposing Israel (I define a difference) and the Zionists for imperial colonisation over Palestine. I think maybe your living back 80 years ago if you think everyone thinks Jews are hook nosed bankers with lots of jewellry. Maybe instead of blaming a long dead anti-semitism, you should look at Zionist imperialism and it's effect not only in Palestine directly but over the whole world.

I mean I personally would never condone terrorism or the like, but much of the people were talking about do not have the luxury of deep analysis as we do, all they see are Israeli troops bulldoving their house down and oppressing their people, people living in poverty and being bombed on the slightest reactionary pretense by the IDF for the actions of minorities in their community. People in those situations are not going to go study the historical implications and add up all the factors, they are going to defend their homes.
I think this situation is made worst also when we see the zionists building more colonies against it's understandings with the rest of the world. Israel needs to get over the feeling sorry for itself routine and look at the world.

Plus also Hezbollah as one MP in the Lebanese Parliament, that's hardly 'letting' suicide bombers leave the country, plus do you think they can watch every metre of their border?

But whats the point of this whole conversation ? France is doing a great job the cease fire is working and ...wtf are the complaints about ?
Some of us just like arguing for the sake of arguing.
Haven't you noticed that yet on this forum?

I'll get to the rest of what you wrote later but I have to go.
First I will say, please don't tell me i am debating this issue with someone referencing Wiki instead of their own learned knowledge. And if you think Wiki is all truth and fact then you need to learn more about that site.
Right there in Bold. "What most Western Commentators..." this shows that whoever wrote that article is looking at it from their specific point of view. now this may make for interesting reading on different takes on the process, but it proves nothing. And no where on that article does it say why these "Western Commentators" blame Arafat for the failing of the talks nor does it address Arafat's own political problems at home where Hamas began questioning his strength as a leader while he was out getting photos with the Israeli leader. Wiki is not Britannica. The man or woman who wrote this had the intention of placing the blame on Barak as well as the Israeli Citizens whom he also mentioned as hurting the cause.

Are you saying the events didn't happen? If not, please provide the alternative.

B.S. If you accuse someone of using a false or flawed source, then back up your skepticism.

Physician, heal thyself.

you realize that france could, if it wanted to, nearly destroy the united states, right?

Now that is funny. I would love to see them even attempt to do so. They thought they had it bad having the nazi tanks rolling in could you imagine what we could.....

I would also like to note how you said "nearly destroy".....this is too much. Some funny stuff...

why must jews be continiuely persecuted for existing? Why must Hezbollah create false propaganda that says jews eat babies for breakfest, lunch and dinner? Why do they have a continuel hostile attitude toward someone who wishes to live in peace? Why did they start the war in the first place? Why did the Hezbollah government allow thousands of sucide bombers over the border?

These are questions you fail to answer.

wow hezbollah has its own country now, i never knew that!:p
when did they start a war?

I haven't read through it but I think some people beat me to it..

I have, and nobody did. Your source of choice and I will not dismiss it because of that alone - I will address all figures mentioned.



If you mean the 1967 borders. Those lands were "spoils of war" that was taken from the ones who started the war as punishment, the Southern Syrians lost those borders because of the stupidity of their allies. If the Arabs had won were they supposed to let Israel go? When you invade you seize land, if you counterattack and end up seizing land back, sucks to be the ones who started it. Saying that the victor should give back what they won is insane...

The Palestinians did not start it in 1967, and having been ejected en-masse in 47/48, I would have thought they had suffered enough. We are not talking about empty areas here. As for attacking and losing - Germany is still intact, as is Japan.


If no one had invaded then those borders would stand as they were. They can't blame Israel, they should be blaming Syria, Egypt, and the others actions.

And if the British had done this and the Nazis not been genocidal we'd all live together in tree-huggy land.....However after 1948 there was a viable state of Israel, recognised by the majority of the world. Nothing subsequent justifies building civillian suburbs ourside its own territory.

you realize that france could, if it wanted to, nearly destroy the united states, right?

ROFLMAO :p :p ***Damn! That is a funny joke...tehe, haha, hoho

I also find it quite humorous how France talks all big and bad when it comes to undermining the US and Israel but when it comes to the terrorists and the regimes that support them, there is no big talk.

I'm pretty sure that even France wouldn't be that stupid to challenge and declare war against the USA. Nukes or no nukes, the French would not stand a chance.

why must jews be continiuely persecuted for existing?Because it was Jews who spread the false religion of their fabricated god and it is Jews who still adhere to that crap. This ideology has poisened mankind through Judaism, Christianity, and Islam in an almost uncurable way. Judaism is evil and thus Jews are evil.

Why must Hezbollah create false propaganda that says jews eat babies for breakfest, lunch and dinner?That's just verbal payback for the Jewish atrocities in Palestine.

Why do they have a continuel hostile attitude toward someone who wishes to live in peace?Israel? The only peace this fake state wants to live in is the forced peace of a Palestine under their control.

Why did they start the war in the first place?Jews started this war in 1948.

Why did the Hezbollah government allow thousands of sucide bombers over the border? Because it is the only way they see to fight the oppressors.

These are questions you fail to answer.Your questions are based on misconceptions.

I also find it quite humorous how France talks all big and bad when it comes to undermining the US and Israel but when it comes to the terrorists and the regimes that support them, there is no big talk.

No, because "big talk" and counter-productive action are less effective than stealthy and efficient action. France has a well-deserved reputation for ruthlessness when it comes to defending its own interests. Except that the French government doesn't waste its time babbling to gullible masses yearning for propaganda, and goes straight to getting things done.

If you weren't quite so shockingly ignorant, you would know this. But then facts and reality would interfere too much with your simplistic little view of the world, and we can't have that now, can we?


I'm pretty sure that even France wouldn't be that stupid to challenge and declare war against the USA. Nukes or no nukes, the French would not stand a chance.

Nor would the US. Which is why the principle is called Mutually Assured Destruction. Not that I would expect you to understand even something this simple.

Responding to the OP - which it seems no one else has bothered with for 13 pages - it does sound an awful lot like France is threatening to blow Israeli planes out of the sky unless they stick to the boundaries marked by the international community. Sort of ironic, in a way, because Israel wouldn't exist save for boundaries set by the international community.

From the peacekeepers' standpoint, though, it is unprecedented that they have to stand between a militia and a real military. Normally actions like this are done to try and stop rag-tag militias from third-world hell holes from killing each other or innocents. That being the case, this is the first peacekeeping mission performed by anyone in which one of the parties being suppressed has a professional army and a real airforce, and as such no one really has their head wrapped around how to deal with fly overs of restricted areas yet. Although the US set a precedent with the Iraqi no-fly zone (blow up offending planes), it has to be remembered that Hezbollah was the aggressor in this episode, so blowing up Israeli planes that aren't blowing up targets might not be the best idea.

Who would have thought a couple of kidnapped IDF soldiers would bring us to the point where a first-world country is threatening to fire on another first-world country?

EDIT: The OP could have started a really interesting conversation, if people hadn't started with the nationalistic version of the "My dad can beat up your dad" argument.

Because it was Jews who spread the false religion of their fabricated god and it is Jews who still adhere to that crap. This ideology has poisened mankind through Judaism, Christianity, and Islam in an almost uncurable way. Judaism is evil and thus Jews are evil.
.

I cry "bollocks" on that.

I don't know if white flags can in fact shoot down an aircraft, but the French are acting kind of funny...as they always do...when it comes to Israel.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20061020/wl_mideast_afp/mideastconflictlebanon

Those wascally Fwench.

Oho. Very comfy for Israel, unilaterally deciding what are "key" obligations on their side and what are not... looks like they have to give their media some "muscle" action to avert the Israeli voters from the bare fact that the government just led the country in a stupid war they were bound to lose from the beginning...
Also I wouldn't go and play the tough guy with France, given that:
1.France's got a bigger army than Israel
2.France's GNP is a lot greater than Israel's
3.France's got a lot more weapons, both conventional and nuclear
4.France is a permanent member of the UN Security Council
5.If Israel would go insane and attack UNIFIL forces, they would be instantly at war with France, Italy and Germany. Well maybe EU countries wouldn't directly attack Israel, but sure they would impose a commercial embargo
6.France has a sense of national pride

I'm sure that the Israeli government is perfectly aware of that. They merely want to show they're still a military power to reckon with, and that they've got enough support at the UN (mostly from the US) to ignore UN resolutions.

I understand the French in this matter and would stand by them if they did attack Israel, Israel must not think that they can do what they want in the region. If this means shooting down Israeli aircraft or attacking Israeli forces then so be it.

Because it was Jews who spread the false religion of their fabricated god and it is Jews who still adhere to that crap. This ideology has poisened mankind through Judaism, Christianity, and Islam in an almost uncurable way. Judaism is evil and thus Jews are evil.

Jews started this war in 1948.

I DO hope you're using sarcasm. If not, be aware that sentences like these are the main reason for Israel and jews everywhere to feel beleaguered by enemies who only want to kill them all - and remember that they've got good facts to support that (persecution by christians, pogroms, attacks from arabs, the Holocaust in WW2 just to name some). And, when a nations feels beleaguered by enemies, it is very likely to take aggressive actions. So, hate-campaigning like this will only increase violence and hatred in the area. If that was your intention, well... I'm appalled.

I seem to remember, from every single history book I've read, that the very day the British troops left Palestine, arab countries attacked Israel simultaneously. So, they didn't start the war. Also I don't think arab countries care very much for the Palestinians - look at the "refugee camps" in Jordan or Lebanon, they look more like "prison camps". Palestinians have been exploited, as a good excuse to attack Israel and fuel ultra-nationalism.

I Palestinians have been exploited, as a good excuse to attack Israel and fuel ultra-nationalism.

Very true. This doesn't excuse the Israelis however.

QUOTE East of Eden is NodBecause it was Jews who spread the false religion of their fabricated god and it is Jews who still adhere to that crap. This ideology has poisened mankind through Judaism, Christianity, and Islam in an almost uncurable way. Judaism is evil and thus Jews are evil.


Hitler what?

what did your kind not get enough of an asswhooping back in 1945? Do we have to commence another?

.

Ahem......

I DO hope you're using sarcasm. If not, be aware that sentences like these are the main reason for Israel and jews everywhere to feel beleaguered by enemies who only want to kill them all - and remember that they've got good facts to support that (persecution by christians, pogroms, attacks from arabs, the Holocaust in WW2 just to name some). And, when a nations feels beleaguered by enemies, it is very likely to take aggressive actions. So, hate-campaigning like this will only increase violence and hatred in the area. If that was your intention, well... I'm appalled.

I seem to remember, from every single history book I've read, that the very day the British troops left Palestine, arab countries attacked Israel simultaneously. So, they didn't start the war. Also I don't think arab countries care very much for the Palestinians - look at the "refugee camps" in Jordan or Lebanon, they look more like "prison camps". Palestinians have been exploited, as a good excuse to attack Israel and fuel ultra-nationalism.

Maybe you should pick up your history books again and read up about what happened prior to the Arab reaction to the "declaration of Israeli statehood", and who decided to give away Arab land against the will of those who actually lived there (they could have conducted a referendum in Palestine, but somehow they would not have liked the predictable outcome).
And don't forget: today it is NOT the Arabs who claim and occupy land that was not theirs prior to a certain unjustified UN decision. The Jews were implanted there (or "allowed in") and the region was dissected among the former imperial powers to prevent a Panarabic state from controlling the increasingly important oil fields. It was easier for the West to deal with petty states in the region instead of a unified political entity that would have replaced the downfallen Ottoman Empire. And then you might want to read up about the circumstances of the life of T. E. Lawrence. And then you might want to read up about the objectives of Zionism and its attitude towards Arabs. And do you know that there actually was a UN resolution defining Zionism to be a form of racism?
The stupid ideology that a human's value depends on his/her descent from certain biblical characters and on his/her adherence to the fabricated Jewish god has poisoned humanity for 2300 years now. After reading the Bible over and over again I have come to the conclusion that Judaism is the most hateful ideology ever conceived, and I extend that judgement to Christianity and Islam with all their sects and offshoots.
I couldn't care less if Jews or Israelis are feeling beleaguered. It is they who are in the wrong. Religiously, ideologically, politically, and in their treatment of non-Jews.

BTW: phosphor bombs.
.

What is it about a simple set of figures that nobody (bar one, who came back) can actually answer?

Or is that they know the answer, and thats why they never come back on it.....

Hezbollah was also using the villages as a docking place for its soldiers, in a way using the people living there as living bodyarmor.

Could the same be said about Israeli reserves being hidden amoungst the civilian population of Israel?

Israel is the only liberal democracy in the Middle East. They should exist.

Palastine? Lebanon?

Incidently - Lebanon has a very sensible solution to maintaning a balance of democracy in parliament between the 40% christian populationand the 60% muslim population. Given a straight democracy this would normally result in a permanent muslim majority, recognising this as an impediment to peace in their country their parliament has 50% of the seats allocated to muslim voters and 50% allocated to christian voters. Further to this the heads of the three branches of government must come from different factions - I forget which is which but one must always be a Christian, the two must be from the two different majority muslim groups in Lebanon.
As to Israels 'democracy' - it seems they are holding onto the West Bank and Gaza until they can figure out a final solution to the palastinian question. If they do claim it as Israel then they have a problem as they will either have to admit the palastinians are 'inferior' and do not deserve the vote or they will have to worry about a muslim parliament. I looks like they are trying to keep the claim without exercising it until they can ger enough Jews in Israel to override the palastinians when they do finally annex the West Bank and Gaza.

As to Israels 'democracy' - it seems they are holding onto the West Bank and Gaza until they can figure out a final solution to the palastinian question. If they do claim it as Israel then they have a problem as they will either have to admit the palastinians are 'inferior' and do not deserve the vote or they will have to worry about a muslim parliament. I looks like they are trying to keep the claim without exercising it until they can ger enough Jews in Israel to override the palastinians when they do finally annex the West Bank and Gaza.


Correct. Given the current situation with the territories, its essentially a semi-racist/sectarian state. And christian palestinians are treated no better than their muslim bretheren.

Correct. Given the current situation with the territories, its essentially a semi-racist/sectarian state. And christian palestinians are treated no better than their muslim bretheren.
The 'semi' need not be in there.

As to Israels 'democracy' - it seems they are holding onto the West Bank and Gaza until they can figure out a final solution to the palastinian question.
It's rather more complex than that.

On one hand there are the settlers who moved there with the approval of previous governments. They are often religiously motivated and see all the land as part of Israel.

Sharon put an end to that in Gaza. He told them "No, this is Palestine. If we are going to sort out a peaceful solution and provide security for Israelis, you are gonna have to get the hell out." You've seen their reaction on the news.

At the same time, to appease the religious and ultraconservative parts of his government and the Israeli establishment (and because he himself wasn't one to give without asking for stuff in return), he assured the settlers in the West Bank that they'd be safe for the time being.

Unfortunately the Palestinian radicals didn't see this pullout as a reasonable precursor to serious negotiations. Instead they loudly proclaimed that their "resistance" and violence forced the Israelis to retreat. Rather than accept the Israeli gesture, they stepped on all the good intentions for political gain (and for some there were ideological reasons as well).

So when Hamas abducted that soldier, it was obvious what would happen. Whether or not the IDF was right to kidnap most of the Hamas parliament is a matter for debate (I'd argue that it isn't helping) - but fact of the matter is that Israel pulled out, a clear statement of intent. And Hamas attacked them.

The West Bank on the other hand...the settlements there are quite large and established. They have important lobbyists and backers - and now they can point to what happened in Gaza and essentially shut down any government plan to pull the settlers out from the West Bank, should one come up.

So much for the immediate politics. Demographically, what you're saying makes no sense. The Palestinians are having a lot more kids than the Israelis. There is no way in hell that Israel could sit back and wait until they populated anything sufficiently. On the contrary - they have to worry that Jews don't become a minority even within Israel, if current population trends relative to Arab Israelis continue.

Ultimately Israel's politicians know that the sensible solution is a two-state solution. On the other hand, they of course want it to happen on a basis that assures Israel's security - and the interests of their various domestic lobby groups.

If there is going to be a Palestinian state, they want it to be ruled by a responsible group of people they can talk to. That makes sense, I believe. I wouldn't ask for anything else. Hamas has not shown any intention to be such a group, so Israel has no interest in seeing a Palestinian state under control of groups like Hamas.

So now they're stuck: The status quo makes extremists more popular, but keeps a limit on the legitimate political power of these extremists. Abandoning the status quo towards creation of Palestine results in these extremists getting more political power until later moderates may gain influence. And conquering or occupying Gaza and the West Bank is an expensive exercise that ultimately brings Israel nothing but problems.

And as if all that isn't enough, most of the planet accuses them of pretty much every crime under the sun. If you ask me, I wouldn't want to be an Israeli politician. And not just because of the media crawling all over me all the time, prosecutors going through my stuff and angry veterans protesting outside on my lawn.

:rolleyes:
Inform yourself, mate. It's the strongest on the continent, and certainly capable of giving the Brits a run for their money.


Nope. Germany's stronger, except that they have lesser naval power and no nukes. Anyway, Germans could easily whip up a nuclear arsenal in no time if they wanted.
Germany beats France by large in air and land power. Eurofighters and Tornados against Mirage and Rafale. Leopard 2A6 and Panzerhaubitze 2000 against AMX.

Too bad for Europe-haters Germany and France are so closely allied!

A lot of Israel's defence is French manufactured. They buy American and French planes/missiles etc.
But France are cowards and almost every other country knows it. They have a huge muslem population, most of which went on a riot last year and set fire to cars.

France would have a good crack at wiping out america if weirdness happened and it came to that, but the only force that has a chance of pulling that stunt is Britain because of the mobility of the submarine launched nuclear arsenal. Russia and China are too far away and would be intercepted.
But Britain would never do that anyway because it is secular and even the centre-right government they consider to be centre-left will always back the prevailing economy, which for the foreseeable future will be America.
India and China can pull statistics out of their asses that make them look strong, but any western citizen can still go there and buy an entourage for the price of a gallon of gasoline.


1.Only a small fraction of french muslims rioted. Check sources.

2.France has SLBM also.

3.And how would US defence system ever intercept a Topol missile? No way. Better be nice to other nuclear powers, expecially those powers who have better weapons.

So much for the immediate politics. Demographically, what you're saying makes no sense. The Palestinians are having a lot more kids than the Israelis. There is no way in hell that Israel could sit back and wait until they populated anything sufficiently. On the contrary - they have to worry that Jews don't become a minority even within Israel, if current population trends relative to Arab Israelis continue.

Ultimately Israel's politicians know that the sensible solution is a two-state solution. On the other hand, they of course want it to happen on a basis that assures Israel's security - and the interests of their various domestic lobby groups.

I think the reason Israel is more keen on a two state solution now is because they have realised that the palastinian population is growing much faster than the Israeli one, and they have realised that importing jews from around the world will not outstrip palastinian population growth.

Hence the shift to a 'two state solution' with a policy of mass illegal immigration into the parts of the West Bank they think they can keep and a 'security wall' that happens to place huge chunks of the West Bank on the Israel side and looks suspiciously like a border wall.

This would have been more difficult in Gaza as it is such a small area with such a high population that it would be very hard not to have to take the whole lot of Gaza and all the Palastinians in it - so they leave it.

First of all, that land was Hebrew land to begin with, the Jews built Jerusalem and rebuilt it and fought for it for thousands of years.

Oh, by the same rule, all of Europe (excluding Scotland, Scandinavia and north-eastern Europe), plus the whole Mediterranean is Roman land. So stop fighting and submit to the She-Wolf of the Capitolium!


Israel would not have had to be formed if it was not for extreme anti-semitism all around Europe, Russia and elsewhere during WWII (and throughout history) and that little event known as the holocaust where millions of the Jewish people were slaughtered in a few years. Israel was and is their sancturary.

Correct. And arab hostility only fuels Israeli paranoia.

First of all, that land was Hebrew land to begin with, the Jews built Jerusalem and rebuilt it and fought for it for thousands of years.
Hebrews first came to the land in circa 1900 BCE. Prior to that is was populated by Canaanites, Hurrites, Phoenicians, Jebusites and numerous other folks in a lively mixture
Dwd captured Jebus/Jerusalem and made it capital of Israel as late as 1005 BCE (with the Jebusite ruler Abdi-Heba remaining in his estate outside the city on top of Mount Moriah).

Israel would not have had to be formed if it was not for extreme anti-semitism all around Europe, Russia and elsewhere during WWII (and throughout history) and that little event known as the holocaust where millions of the Jewish people were slaughtered in a few years. Israel was and is their sancturary.
So you are saying that it is just that Arabs are supposed to pay for "anti-semitism all around Europe, Russia and elsewhere" ? Arabs had nothing to do with the holocaust, so why do you construct a connection by linking the creation of Israel in the Middle east with what the Germans did in Europe? You blame Arabs for German crimes? You know well enough that the the Jewish urge for statehood in the Middle East predates the rise to power of the Nationalsocialists in Germany. Zionists pretended that Palestine was an empty country only waiting to be settled by Jews and that Arabs were some kind of Untermensch.

Missed this...


First of all, that land was Hebrew land to begin with, the Jews built Jerusalem and rebuilt it and fought for it for thousands of years.

Cannanies?

This line of logic 'it was ours to begin with, except for those people who were there before us but they don't count' is a pretty shoddy one. By that line you should also be in full support of, say, France if they decide to expel all Jews - if you are prepared to support expelling Palastinians from what is now Israel.

Furthermore I assume you feel all Americans of European descent should get the fuck out of the US?

Or does the 'we we're sort of here first so we can kick people out' only apply to Israel?


Israel would not have had to be formed if it was not for extreme anti-semitism all around Europe, Russia and elsewhere during WWII (and throughout history) and that little event known as the holocaust where millions of the Jewish people were slaughtered in a few years. Israel was and is their sancturary.
So... why did the palastinians have to pay for Europes mistake? What part did they play in the holocaust?

Also - this does not explain the huge numbers of American Jews who emigrated to Israel... Anti-semitism in the US too? Genocide there?


EDIT: East of Eden is Nod beat me too all this.

Maybe you should pick up your history books again and read up about what happened prior to the Arab reaction to the "declaration of Israeli statehood", and who decided to give away Arab land against the will of those who actually lived there (they could have conducted a referendum in Palestine, but somehow they would not have liked the predictable outcome).
And don't forget: today it is NOT the Arabs who claim and occupy land that was not theirs prior to a certain unjustified UN decision. The Jews were implanted there (or "allowed in") and the region was dissected among the former imperial powers to prevent a Panarabic state from controlling the increasingly important oil fields. It was easier for the West to deal with petty states in the region instead of a unified political entity that would have replaced the downfallen Ottoman Empire. And then you might want to read up about the circumstances of the life of T. E. Lawrence. And then you might want to read up about the objectives of Zionism and its attitude towards Arabs. And do you know that there actually was a UN resolution defining Zionism to be a form of racism?
The stupid ideology that a human's value depends on his/her descent from certain biblical characters and on his/her adherence to the fabricated Jewish god has poisoned humanity for 2300 years now. After reading the Bible over and over again I have come to the conclusion that Judaism is the most hateful ideology ever conceived, and I extend that judgement to Christianity and Islam with all their sects and offshoots.
I couldn't care less if Jews or Israelis are feeling beleaguered. It is they who are in the wrong. Religiously, ideologically, politically, and in their treatment of non-Jews.

BTW: phosphor bombs.
.

1.You seem to forget that the Turk rulers and Arab land-owners were quite happy to sell land to the rich Jews who came out of Europe (this happened throughout the 2nd half of 19th century). And most Arabs never cared about Palestinians, because they were poor. They just used the Palestinian question to justify a war against Israel.

2.Unified political entity? Huh? And when Near and Middle East has ever been united? Some years after Muhammad, and then by the Turks. Stop. Ask the Egyptians, or the Syrians, if they ever wanted to be ruled by the Saudis, for example. Very small chanches Arab countries will form a unified political entity, at least for the next 2 centuries.

3.You suppose I don't know about Lawrence. Well, I happen to know about him. And I think he was one of the worst war criminals ever. And a megalomaniac. So I won't waste my time reading that "Seven pillars" thing or whatever his original title is.

4.I think there is a slight difference between zionism as legitimate jewish-israeli nationalism - the original meaning - and zionism as jewish-superiority racist theory.

5.Fabricated god? Do you know of any REAL god? I do not. In my opinion, gods are made by humans. I'm not the religious type.

6.If you don't understand how the Israeli feel, you'll never be able to understand their actions, their projects and politics. Note that I said "understand", not "justify". I do not justify war crimes. I understand, however, why Israel has such an aggressive behaviour. And fueling hatred towards the jews will only make things worse.

7.Phosphor bombs. Ok. Thank you. (I don't have time to check my english dictionary every time).

Hebrews first came to the land in circa 1900 BCE. Prior to that is was populated by Canaanites, Hurrites, Phoenicians, Jebusites and numerous other folks in a lively mixture
Dwd captured Jebus/Jerusalem and made it capital of Israel as late as 1005 BCE (with the Jebusite ruler Abdi-Heba remaining in his estate outside the city on top of Mount Moriah).

And this is stated in the Bible also. Exodus and Kings.

arabs pay for "anti-semitism all around Europe, Russia and elsewhere" ? Arabs had nothing to do with the holocaust, so why do you construct a connection by linking the creation of Israel in the Middle east with what the Germans did in Europe?
I think that Arabs got caught in the thing because:
1.That land was under British control and the Brits thought they could do whatever they wanted with it.
2.European jews wanted a land and a country of their own, and since the last country they had was Palestine, it was natural for them to look for Palestine again. In my opinion, CCCP took a better action, by granting the Jews the almost inhabited Birobidz'an (eastern Siberia).
So, there is A link. But Holocaust isn't the Arabs' fault. The world isn't fair, and Arabs are victims of history and colonisation. As for Israel to leave Near East, well, that is simply not realistic. They will never accept that, unless you bash Israel in a war. Which the Arab countries tried to do and failed. So maybe it is time talking peace. Not a "just" peace. Simply an "acceptable" peace.

1.You seem to forget that the Turk rulers and Arab land-owners were quite happy to sell land to the rich Jews who came out of Europe (this happened throughout the 2nd half of 19th century). And most Arabs never cared about Palestinians, because they were poor. They just used the Palestinian question to justify a war against Israel. ).

Firstly the amount of land bought by settlers was tiny. Secondly, yes the Palestinians have been used. None of this really excuses a recognised state and nuclear power building colonies outside its borders.


3.You suppose I don't know about Lawrence. Well, I happen to know about him. And I think he was one of the worst war criminals ever. And a megalomaniac. So I won't waste my time reading that "Seven pillars" thing or whatever his original title is.).

Having read it myself, and being familiar with the events, I suggest you have him confused with somebody else.

1. You seem to ignore that Jews only owned a pretty small percentage of the land and surely they were never in a majority to claim the entire land for themselves. Even on the day of the Israeli declaration of statehood Jews did not constitute the majority of the population in any of the three territories outlined by the UN.

2. If the imperial powers had not cut up the Middle East into zones of their interests there surely would have evolved a Panarabic state (without the Saudis who you seem to confuse with Arabs).

3. He supported the Arabs against the Turks. Fighting against oppressors is never a war crime.

4. There is no difference between Zionism and Zionism. And there is no legitimate Jewish nationalism. Judaism is a denomination, not a nation.

5. Biblical monotheism did not exist prior to the Persian/Achaemenid era, and Yah was never believed in or worshipped in the manner the Bible claims even for very ancient folks. It is basically all a projection of later Jewish beliefs into the past.

6. I understand how Israelis feel. I also understand how non-Israelis feel. And why. I also know that Jews have a very long history of not getting along. So I ask you who is to blame for aggressions.

7. Israel was using phosphor bombs against Lebanon in the recent (and not yet over) conflict. This clearly shows how low Israelis are. They just wanted to kill, and make sure the killing happened in one of the most painful ways imaginable. It seems Jews have learned a lot from the Nazis.


Not a "just" peace. Simply an "acceptable" peace.

A peace that is not just is never acceptable.
.

Quite frankly it's about time that the UN considered consolidating Lebanon's border protection. These aerial intrusions are not just a show of arrogance and superiority, but a constant reminder that Israel continues to threaten Lebanon and the region, and will do so until checked. The whole idea that Hezbollah triggered the start of the war is exaggerated. They kidnapped two soldiers, and so the Israeli response is to declare war on Lebanon as a whole knowing full well that there will be casualties on both sides, including civilian casualties, as well as international ramifications. They risked sparking another major war in the region for the sake of a couple of soldiers and a handful of rockets? If there was no ulterior motive, has Israel gone mad with power?

As for the statements regarding France's military power, rest assured that they have enough nuclear weapons to push the U.S. back to third world status. Have you forgotten the days of the Cold War? 44 years ago, to the day, every major city in America was under threat by nuclear missiles based in Cuba, a third world power. It is 44 years on. France, a country that depends on nuclear power for 90% of its electricity generation, is a fully developed country. With existing ICBM technology today, the only thing obstructing the opening of Pandora's Box is the concept of mutually assured destruction. Learn it.

Anyway, as far as nuclear considerations would go, France would never attack a European-born western power, let alone the U.S. of A. To do so would be suicidal in the extreme, as it would inevitably result in a nuclear war that France could not possibly "win" (nobody wins in a nuclear war). In any case, France was "threatening" Israel, not America.

It's rather more complex than that.

On one hand there are the settlers who moved there with the approval of previous governments. They are often religiously motivated and see all the land as part of Israel.

Sharon put an end to that in Gaza. He told them "No, this is Palestine. If we are going to sort out a peaceful solution and provide security for Israelis, you are gonna have to get the hell out." You've seen their reaction on the news.
.

Far truer to say he decided to focus the resources on the West Bank/Arab East Jerusalem while simulataneously sidelining the Palestinians, under the pretext of a "generous move".

"Sharon plan 'blocked peace talks'
A top Israeli official has claimed that Ariel Sharon's Gaza withdrawal plan was deliberately formulated to block peace negotiations with Yasser Arafat.
"The significance of the plan is the freezing of the peace process," Dov Weisglass told Haaretz newspaper, adding the US had given its backing.

Palestinian statehood, refugees and the status of Jerusalem had effectively been dropped off the agenda, he said. "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3720176.stm

I am not sure about this French leader. He's the one who said Israel's reponse to Hizballah rockets and missles and the kidnappings was disproportionate, yet earlier he said he wouldn't think twice about using nukes if threatened by Islamist terrorists.

Nope. Germany's stronger, except that they have lesser naval power and no nukes. Anyway, Germans could easily whip up a nuclear arsenal in no time if they wanted.
But the French Army is an entire package. The Bundeswehr was constructed from day one to fight within the NATO framework against the Russians. It's not really meant to fight a war on its own.

Germany beats France by large in air and land power. Eurofighters and Tornados against Mirage and Rafale. Leopard 2A6 and Panzerhaubitze 2000 against AMX.
The Tornados aren't fighter jets though, they're anti-radar fighter bombers. Believe it or not, but F-4 Phantoms were until only a year or so ago the main fighter jet of the Luftwaffe.
The Leopard assortment is drastically being cut right now. They used to have 2000, once they're done they'll have 350. Also, you forget the Leclerc.

As for the PzH2000...as neat as it is, the Luftwaffe is probably right to laugh itself silly about it. Modern jets can bring in various ordinance with just as great accuracy but over much greater ranges.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,435368,00.html
With deployments in the Balkans, Afghanistan, Africa and now the Middle East, Germany's military, the Bundeswehr, is fast becoming the global service provider for German foreign policy. But the force is insufficiently prepared for its new tasks and, as it is about to embark to Lebanon on its next foreign mission, remains underfunded and poorly equipped.

Far truer to say he decided to focus the resources on the West Bank/Arab East Jerusalem while simulataneously sidelining the Palestinians, under the pretext of a "generous move".
Because?

Always the conspiracy theories. The Israelis have politicians and public opinion like any other country. That's what I meant to show with my posts. There is no conspiracy to commit a massive land grab, and Israel has only to gain from seeing a stable Palestinian State formed.

As long as the Palestinians show no interest in forming such a state, I don't see what Israel should be doing according to you.

And at the same time there are the settler lobbyists. It cost Sharon a lot of votes to pull out from Gaza, and his party essentially kicked him out. Doesn't sound like the reaction to a master plan like you describe.

And now - look at Hamas' reaction. It'll be many years before an Israeli politician will again be able to ask whether it might be a good idea to pull a few settler out of anywhere.

So you are saying that it is just that Arabs are supposed to pay for "anti-semitism all around Europe, Russia and elsewhere" ? Arabs had nothing to do with the holocaust, so why do you construct a connection by linking the creation of Israel in the Middle east with what the Germans did in Europe? You blame Arabs for German crimes? You know well enough that the the Jewish urge for statehood in the Middle East predates the rise to power of the Nationalsocialists in Germany. Zionists pretended that Palestine was an empty country only waiting to be settled by Jews and that Arabs were some kind of Untermensch.

The Arabs are not paying for anything. The majority of Arabs do not give a damn about the Palestinians or their welfare and are not effected by Israel. They just do not like the Jews being there.

The Jews, the people without a land, were returning to their home, their holy land. After European/Russian anti-semitism crystalized in the 1930s, they flocked to Palestine in large numbers to seek sanctuary because they had nowhere else to go. I am not saying the Arabs have to "pay" for German crimes. Does living next to a Jew qualify as a form of "payment"?

They had nowhere else to go yet were aware of their history and holy cities in Palestine and felt a calling to return. They went home. The Palestinians were alarmed by the large amounts of immigration and good old fashioned Xenophobia kicked in. The rest I went over already.

I certainly do not believe the Arabs should "pay" for German/European crimes as you suggested. I also don't feel that the Jews should return to Europe or that they don't belong in Israel/Palestine as many Arab leaders suggest.

Oh, by the same rule, all of Europe (excluding Scotland, Scandinavia and north-eastern Europe), plus the whole Mediterranean is Roman land. So stop fighting and submit to the She-Wolf of the Capitolium!

Explain to me exactly what a Roman is. As far as I know, the modern day Romans are the Italians and they still have a home in Rome and the surrounding areas which now make up Italy. Their Empire of Conquest no longer exists however and I am sure France, Spain, Egypt, Syria, Turkey, etc. are happy about that.




Correct. And arab hostility only fuels Israeli paranoia.

Yes it does. are you trying to argue with me on something or just making a point? Because I agree. The arab hostility and acts of, and sympathy for, terrorism certainly fuels Israeli paranoia, as it would any people of any nation. Yet Israel, in the midst of all this paranoia, manages to maintain a working Democracy rich in culture and opportunity.

Because it was Jews who spread the false religion of their fabricated god and it is Jews who still adhere to that crap. This ideology has poisened mankind through Judaism, Christianity, and Islam in an almost uncurable way. Judaism is evil and thus Jews are evil.

That's just verbal payback for the Jewish atrocities in Palestine.

Israel? The only peace this fake state wants to live in is the forced peace of a Palestine under their control.

Jews started this war in 1948.

Because it is the only way they see to fight the oppressors.

Your questions are based on misconceptions.

You sound like a religous bigot. You claim their God is false, yet this is an untestable hypothesis. It is what you choose to believe, as they choose to believe in their God. If you fault them for their faith then you are just as much at fault with your lack of faith.

And with the exception of the radical Likud party, the Jewish people and leaders do not wish for a forced peace with a palestinian state under their control. They want a legitimate peace where walls do not have to be built and they can send their kids off to school without worries their insides will be smeared all over the inside of a bus thanks to some poor brainwashed suicide bomber recruited by Jihadists.

The Tornados aren't fighter jets though, they're anti-radar fighter bombers.


The Tornados are fighters. There is a ECR variant that does anti-radar, but thats like saying a growler makes an F-18 not a fighter/bomber.
Just wanted to throw that out there.

Wrong. Hezbollah isnt a state, therefore they are not part of the UN and not subject in particular to the Articles of War, no condoning of their tactics here buy seriously they dont have to play fair when their not a nation.

But on the other hand Israel is a state, and I think at this point it's pretty obvious they targetted civilians because they couldn't find enough militias to kill. Saying Hezbollah kills civilians is not a justification to the IDF for doing the same. I mean have you seen some of the images etc from Beirut and the like, entire high rise apartments leveled with noone but families in them, convoys of civilian cars trying to flee (and were given clearance by the IDF to leave) were subsequenctly bombed.

IDF military leaders (or politcal) need to be brought foward to the UN War Crimes Tribunal as far as I am concerned, you take the responsibility for being a state, you play by the rules. And on the topic of holocaust denying, if it happened in Europe, why must the Palestinians suffer on their own land?


I have no idea what the IDF was thinking with the constant bombing of Beirut. I do feel that IDF leadership failed their soldiers and their country with their indecision and questionable tactics. At first it made perfect sense to bomb the airport and the connecting highway to Syria to limit movement of both men and supplies but the ground invasion into southern Lebanon never went into full effect. As I said before, it seemed like the IDF flinched.

The Labanese were very upset with Hezbollah for bringing a war into their backyard, but Israel failed to capitalize on this brief anti-Hezbollah sentiment.

So I disapproved of the constant bombing of civilian targets in Beirut but I would have supported a full on invasion of Hezbollah dominated and controlled Southern Lebanon by the IDF. It would have been an appropriate, and proportionate response. Hezbollah should be disarmed by the UN peacekeepers as well.

The Tornados are fighters. There is a ECR variant that does anti-radar, but thats like saying a growler makes an F-18 not a fighter/bomber.
Just wanted to throw that out there.
Not the ones in Luftwaffe service though. :)

I have no idea what the IDF was thinking with the constant bombing of Beirut. I do feel that IDF leadership failed their soldiers and their country with their indecision and questionable tactics. At first it made perfect sense to bomb the airport and the connecting highway to Syria to limit movement of both men and supplies but the ground invasion into southern Lebanon never went into full effect. As I said before, it seemed like the IDF flinched.

The Labanese were very upset with Hezbollah for bringing a war into their backyard, but Israel failed to capitalize on this brief anti-Hezbollah sentiment.

So I disapproved of the constant bombing of civilian targets in Beirut but I would have supported a full on invasion of Hezbollah dominated and controlled Southern Lebanon by the IDF. It would have been an appropriate, and proportionate response. Hezbollah should be disarmed by the UN peacekeepers as well.

That is not a solution and you know it, the Zionists have occupied the country before and they got whittled down by insurgents, the French made the same problem in the south with getting into firefights with militias.
The best solution is for the Zionists to stop blaming terrorist actions on states and stop annexing everyones land because you think you 'earnt it' via the Holocaust.

The best solution is for the Zionists to stop blaming terrorist actions on states and stop annexing everyones land because you think you 'earnt it' via the Holocaust.
Ahem, right.

a) I agree that the Lebanese government didn't have much power to stop Hezbollah. Yet the links between the Lebanese political establishment and the radical military wing of Hezbollah should be obvious to you.
b) They didn't annex anything. The Golan Heights are the only thing that comes to mind...and that's an empty bit of rock that Arab armies used to fire artillery shells into Israel, which they occupied. Today that risk doesn't exist anymore, so some sort of return to the original owner should be considered - but that would have to be negotiated mutually, and it's not like Syria has been particularly rational or worthy of respect the past year or two.
c) They earned it not because of the Holocaust, but because today's Israelis have lived there all their lifes. Some old ones earned it because they made the place into something from nothing, Kibbutzim style.
d) I'm a Zionist too. I believe that the Jews have a right to a country they can call their own if they so choose.
Hardly a good word to use to describe the IDF then, is it. Instead it just makes the post look antisemitic, which you want to avoid if possible.

Firstly the amount of land bought by settlers was tiny. Secondly, yes the Palestinians have been used. None of this really excuses a recognised state and nuclear power building colonies outside its borders.

I agree.

Ahem, right.

a) I agree that the Lebanese government didn't have much power to stop Hezbollah. Yet the links between the Lebanese political establishment and the radical military wing of Hezbollah should be obvious to you.
b) They didn't annex anything. The Golan Heights are the only thing that comes to mind...and that's an empty bit of rock that Arab armies used to fire artillery shells into Israel, which they occupied. Today that risk doesn't exist anymore, so some sort of return to the original owner should be considered - but that would have to be negotiated mutually, and it's not like Syria has been particularly rational or worthy of respect the past year or two.
c) They earned it not because of the Holocaust, but because today's Israelis have lived there all their lifes. Some old ones earned it because they made the place into something from nothing, Kibbutzim style.
d) I'm a Zionist too. I believe that the Jews have a right to a country they can call their own if they so choose.
Hardly a good word to use to describe the IDF then, is it. Instead it just makes the post look antisemitic, which you want to avoid if possible.

So because massive amounts of German minorities existed post Versailles in Europe outside Germany, this gave Hitler a right to systematically invade and annex these countries, just because people of your nationa/ethnicity live there? Nice logic there.
Anti-semitism has only existed in a violent sense in Europe, Anti-semitism as you call it in the ME is NOT anti-semitism, it is the same kind of 'accepted inferiority' that Jews got centuries earlier in Europe and in the Ottoman Empire. It wasn't anti-semitism to the extend that it equated Jews as a cosmic evil and enemy, it happened because they started migration over there and the arabs natural reaction to this was to resist, nothing racist about it. And even that mild anti-zionism is a direct consequence of Israeli imperialism and continual attacks on it's neighbours.

2. If the imperial powers had not cut up the Middle East into zones of their interests there surely would have evolved a Panarabic state (without the Saudis who you seem to confuse with Arabs).

3. He supported the Arabs against the Turks. Fighting against oppressors is never a war crime.

4. There is no difference between Zionism and Zionism. And there is no legitimate Jewish nationalism. Judaism is a denomination, not a nation.

5. Biblical monotheism did not exist prior to the Persian/Achaemenid era, and Yah was never believed in or worshipped in the manner the Bible claims even for very ancient folks. It is basically all a projection of later Jewish beliefs into the past.

6. I understand how Israelis feel. I also understand how non-Israelis feel. And why. I also know that Jews have a very long history of not getting along. So I ask you who is to blame for aggressions.

7. Israel was using phosphor bombs against Lebanon in the recent (and not yet over) conflict. This clearly shows how low Israelis are. They just wanted to kill, and make sure the killing happened in one of the most painful ways imaginable. It seems Jews have learned a lot from the Nazis.

A peace that is not just is never acceptable.
.

2.Are you saying that the Saudis aren't Arabs? Well, tell me who is an Arab, then. Maybe just Yemenites?

3.Lawrence wasn't exactly fighting for the liberation of Arabic masses. As a British officer, he was there to use the Arabs against the Turks - and he did that quite well. Also, Lawrence's success allowed the British and the French to seize and split between themselves the Arab lands.
And, even if Lawrence was a freedom fighter, some of his war actions qualify as war crimes (like killing Turk soldiers who surrendered).

4.Being a Jew is ALSO feeling as a nation. And if a group chooses to be a nation, and retains its cultural heritage throughout three millennia, it is a nation.
Judaism is not a denomination, it is a religion. And Zionism began as a movement calling for european Jews to escape persecution in Europe and come back to the lands they were forced to leave by the Romans (Diaspora). I agree that extremistic fringes exist, and that those fringes seem to get more influential each day. But, again, islamic and arab extremism is doing a good job in fueling zionist extremists.

5.Monotheism was introduced by Moses. Note that Moses was an egyptian jew, and a priest of the monotheistic religion enforced to Egypt by pharaoh Akhenaton. Aton in egyptian monotheism = Adonai in the Bible. In the Genesis, God is referred to with the name "Elohu"; the plural form "Elohim" is also used, thus giving a hint about polytheistic tradition.

6.Oh yes. So since Jews have a long history of not getting along, we'd better kill them all or put them all on some god-forsaken island - is that what you mean? Also Arabs don't have a good reputation about getting along, given how Islam spread through northern Africa, Spain and the Balkans... also Christian waged wars around... also a lot of other groups did... so what?
Take Germany and France. Since Charlemagne died, they've been almost constantly at war for 1100 years. And now they're buddies, and the best promoters of european unification. So I guess that Israel and Palestine can also find some appeasement.
Let's drop the "blame" thing, this will never take us any step towards peace, since the three sides (Palestine, Israel and surrounding Arabs countries) aren't exactly innocent.

7.Again, are you sure that Israelis are the only ones who are so "low"? I don't think that blasting a bomb in a crowded market in Jerusalem or Tel Aviv, killing indiscriminately a lot of civilians, is a better action that using P bombs. Both sides need to stop such actions, or war will never end.
Also, yes, it is sad that Israel looks like using nazi tactics. It is also sad that some Palestinians in WW2 and a lot of young muslims in France actually support(ed) nazism as a retaliation against Jews.
And keep in mind that Jews are one thing, the state of Israel is another thing and that the Israeli citizens are a third (for example, there are muslim and christian Israeli citizens).

8.A peace that is not just has to be accepted sometimes. Again, example with Germany. Do you think that it is just that so many germans were forced to leave the country they've lived in for centuries in favour of France (Alsace/Lorraine, also known as Elsasz-Lothringen), Poland and Russia (Germany lost the whole Prussia, the western and central part to Poland and eastern Prussia to Russia). Yet that has granted an acceptable peace for more than 60 years. If you're looking for justice, well, that's a different thing from international politics. But beware that not accepting a peace because it is unjust will lead to a war. Do you like wars?

added. If you're thinking that I support somehow Israeli war crimes, I suggest you to check who posted the OP in the thread about Israeli cabinet admitting use of P devices in Lebanon.

But the French Army is an entire package. The Bundeswehr was constructed from day one to fight within the NATO framework against the Russians. It's not really meant to fight a war on its own.
I agree, but the Germans could if they wanted.


The Tornados aren't fighter jets though, they're anti-radar fighter bombers. Believe it or not, but F-4 Phantoms were until only a year or so ago the main fighter jet of the Luftwaffe.
The Leopard assortment is drastically being cut right now. They used to have 2000, once they're done they'll have 350. Also, you forget the Leclerc.

Well, no. Tornados come in three variants:
IDS (interdiction and deep strike - basically a bomber, similar to CCCP's Su-24 and USA's F-111)
ECR (anti-radar missile platform)
ADV (air defence variant, meant for CAP, carries 4 long-range radar missiles like the Skyflash, the AMRAAM and the Aspide Mk.2 plus some IR missiles).
Check at http://www.fas.org

As for the PzH2000 ... Modern jets can bring in various ordinance with just as great accuracy but over much greater ranges.
The PzH2000 is a more stealthy way of delivering warheads than by bomber aircrafts, though. It is a great tactical support for Panzer and Panzergrenadier brigades, and cannot be engaged by FlAK.

Oops. I totally forgot about the Leclerc. Not as powerful as the Leo2A6, though.

The Golan Heights are the only thing that comes to mind...and that's an empty bit of rock that Arab armies used to fire artillery shells into Israel, which they occupied.

Mmhh.. the Golan heights are also one of the best water sources in the area (it snows on Golan in winter!).

The Jews, the people without a land, were returning to their home, their holy land. After European/Russian anti-semitism crystalized in the 1930s, they flocked to Palestine in large numbers to seek sanctuary because they had nowhere else to go. I am not saying the Arabs have to "pay" for German crimes. Does living next to a Jew qualify as a form of "payment"?
It was also the palastinians home too.

I think being kicked off your land so a jew can live on it does qualify as payment.

If European anti-semitism is the reason so many Jews left Europe, why did so many leave America?

And the Zionist movement started LONG before WW2.

They had nowhere else to go yet were aware of their history and holy cities in Palestine and felt a calling to return. They went home. The Palestinians were alarmed by the large amounts of immigration and good old fashioned Xenophobia kicked in. The rest I went over already.
Given what the Zionist plan was, and how it shaped up for the palastinians I think they had a right to be a bit worried. Incidently - it's not as though the Jewish did not engage in a bit of terrorism here and there before they were officially a state and could then call those actions 'security measures'

I certainly do not believe the Arabs should "pay" for German/European crimes as you suggested.
You just feel that they should all pack up and leave their homeland and then everyone can be friends?

b) They didn't annex anything. The Golan Heights are the only thing that comes to mind...and that's an empty bit of rock that Arab armies used to fire artillery shells into Israel, which they occupied.
Except for the people who were kicked off their farms

c) They earned it not because of the Holocaust, but because today's Israelis have lived there all their lifes. Some old ones earned it because they made the place into something from nothing, Kibbutzim style.
From the CIA World Factbook (Unlikely to be Anti-Israel)
Jewish 76.4% (Israel-born 51.3%, Europe/America-born 17.3%, Africa-born 4.5%, Asia-born 3.2%), non-Jewish 23.6% (mostly Arab) (2004)

So only half the Jewish people in Israel were born there, compared to all the palastinians.

I think the palastinians also had something there before Israel too. It was hardly 'nothing', or are you saying nothing in Israel is over 60 years old?

d) I'm a Zionist too. I believe that the Jews have a right to a country they can call their own if they so choose.
Why does a religion have the right to a country? Many religions do not have countries. And why does that supposed right mean they can take a country by force and expand it by force?

Are you saying that the Saudis aren't Arabs? Well, tell me who is an Arab, then. Maybe just Yemenites?The Saudis (i.e. the ruling clan) are not considered Arabs by Arabs, not even by the inhabitants of the country that bears their name.

Being a Jew is ALSO feeling as a nation. And if a group chooses to be a nation, and retains its cultural heritage throughout three millennia, it is a nation.
Judaism is not a denomination, it is a religion. And Zionism began as a movement calling for european Jews to escape persecution in Europe and come back to the lands they were forced to leave by the Romans (Diaspora). I agree that extremistic fringes exist, and that those fringes seem to get more influential each day. But, again, islamic and arab extremism is doing a good job in fueling zionist extremists.What Jews allegedly feel is not relevant. And Jewish cultural heritage is just the mockery of the high cultures they encountered in the last two and a half millennia. What have Jews really given to the world except a distorted perspective of a more ancient god.

Monotheism was introduced by Moses. Note that Moses was an egyptian jew, and a priest of the monotheistic religion enforced to Egypt by pharaoh Akhenaton. Aton in egyptian monotheism = Adonai in the Bible. In the Genesis, God is referred to with the name "Elohu"; the plural form "Elohim" is also used, thus giving a hint about polytheistic tradition.Biblical monotheism was introduced by Jewish scholars in the Persian era, just a century or maybe two before the first Bible was written by Jews from Alexandria in the beginning of the Hellenistic/Ptolemaic era. Prior to that monotheism in the region was only followed by some Persians in Zoroastrism (i.e. the worship of Ahura Mazda).
Note that Moses was an egyptian Israelite (not a Jew, since he was from the House of Levi and not from the House of Yehud). Moses was raised at the court of Khaneferre Sobekhotep IV (rendered Khenepherês in Greek) in Itj-Tawy and later in Auaris while the Exodus happened under king Djedneferre Dudimose (rendered Tutimaos in Greek). All in the 13th Dynasty of Egypt (prior to that Joseph had been vizier of Kakaure Senuseret III and Nimaatre Amenemhat III of the 12th Dynasty). Akhenaten was over 400 years later, and the heresy of Akhenaten was not really a form of monotheism anyways, it was just an extreme exaltation of his father's deification over the other gods.
At the time of Moses Yah (=Enki) and El (=Enlil) were still two distinct gods from the Mesopotamian pantheon who were worshipped throughout the Middle East. Moses came in contact with the Yah-cult through his encounter with the Midianites, prior to that he only knew of the by the almost forgotten El-cult of the Israelites in Egypt.
Adonai/Adonis is the name of a god in the Amurru pantheon later incorporated into the Greek and also the Jewish pantheon.
You know nothing about Egyptian history and your evangelical lore is trash.
There is not a single source to confirm any Jewish claim about biblical monotheism prior to the return from the Babylonian Exile.
http://www.history-book.net/maps/ancient_middle_east.jpg
http://www.history-book.net/maps//eastern_nile_delta.gif

Oh yes. So since Jews have a long history of not getting along, we'd better kill them all or put them all on some god-forsaken island - is that what you mean? Jews are already god-forsaken. And they could only be shipped to an island if it is unpopulated, otherwise they would just do the same to the islanders they now do to the Arabs/Palestinians. What do you expect of people who take pride in the biblical narrative of Joshua conquering and slaughtering Canaan? And in Elijah killing non-believers (in a Jewish view) by the hundreds.

Also Arabs don't have a good reputation about getting along, given how Islam spread through northern Africa, Spain and the Balkans... also Christian waged wars around... also a lot of other groups did... so what? When Islam first spread it was very well received by most, since it gave answers Judaism and Christiany fail to give, especially in daily life and in state matters.
Anyways Christianity and Islam are both based on Jewish ideology.

Take Germany and France. Since Charlemagne died, they've been almost constantly at war for 1100 years. And now they're buddies, and the best promoters of european unification. Germany did not even exist as a real political entity prior to 1870. Go read a history book.

So I guess that Israel and Palestine can also find some appeasement.
Let's drop the "blame" thing, this will never take us any step towards peace, since the three sides (Palestine, Israel and surrounding Arabs countries) aren't exactly innocent.Jews/Israelis have always had only one interest in peace: their forced peace in Erez Yisrael as envisioned by the Zionist movement. Without Arabs or non-Jews. But due to their insufficient numbers and their subsequent inability to cleanse Palestine from the Arabs they have now changed to defining their borders (far inside Arab land) without any negotiation or compromise. A peace process never really existed. And don’t forget: Arabs are not the ones who have gone to a foreign land to create a state. The European Jews are the intruders, aggressors, and occupiers.

Again, are you sure that Israelis are the only ones who are so "low"? I don't think that blasting a bomb in a crowded market in Jerusalem or Tel Aviv, killing indiscriminately a lot of civilians, is a better action that using P bombs. Both sides need to stop such actions, or war will never end.
Also, yes, it is sad that Israel looks like using nazi tactics. It is also sad that some Palestinians in WW2 and a lot of young muslims in France actually support(ed) nazism as a retaliation against Jews.
And keep in mind that Jews are one thing, the state of Israel is another thing and that the Israeli citizens are a third (for example, there are muslim and christian Israeli citizens).
There is a difference between a rogue state dropping phosphor bombs on the inhabitants of another country and desparate people blowing themselves up to kill the occupiers of their home land.
There is no real need to distinguish between Jews and Israelis here. "Israel" ist just a superficial renaming of Jewish immigrants from Europe. They are the same persons though.

A peace that is not just has to be accepted sometimes. Again, example with Germany. Do you think that it is just that so many germans were forced to leave the country they've lived in for centuries in favour of France (Alsace/Lorraine, also known as Elsasz-Lothringen), Poland and Russia (Germany lost the whole Prussia, the western and central part to Poland and eastern Prussia to Russia). Yet that has granted an acceptable peace for more than 60 years. If you're looking for justice, well, that's a different thing from international politics. But beware that not accepting a peace because it is unjust will lead to a war. Do you like wars?Alsacians were not forced to leave. And the German territorial losses were just because it was Germany that started and lost the wars WW1 and WW2.
Arabs on the other side never started a war but nevertheless they must suffer the implantation of a foreign group of people into their very heartland.

added. If you're thinking that I support somehow Israeli war crimes, I suggest you to check who posted the OP in the thread about Israeli cabinet admitting use of P devices in Lebanon.You support Israel and Israel is a war crime.
Did you post that after I gave you the hint?
.

So because massive amounts of German minorities existed post Versailles in Europe outside Germany, this gave Hitler a right to systematically invade and annex these countries, just because people of your nationa/ethnicity live there? Nice logic there.
What?

Anti-semitism has only existed in a violent sense in Europe, Anti-semitism as you call it in the ME is NOT anti-semitism, it is the same kind of 'accepted inferiority' that Jews got centuries earlier in Europe and in the Ottoman Empire.
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here, but "accepted inferiority" is no better, especially if it's gonna mean that Jews will have to live under Muslim rule and pay jizya taxes and all that crap.

And even that mild anti-zionism is a direct consequence of Israeli imperialism and continual attacks on it's neighbours.
Hmm, let me see...oh, yes. It was the Arabs who did the attacking most of the time.
Maybe we should stop portraying either side as victims.

well if more people would stand up to Isreal the better. the second worst threat to world stability.

I think the palastinians also had something there before Israel too. It was hardly 'nothing', or are you saying nothing in Israel is over 60 years old?
The fact that Israel is not a poor country like Syria or Lebanon is due to the will and the effort the Jewish immigrants put in. The fact that Israel can actually export food despite being essentially a bunch of arid rocks is due to the efforts of Israeli farmers. Why do you think the Ottomans and land owners were so willing to give it away?

Of course it wasn't literally "nothing", but the fact is that Israel is now a relatively successful country due to the fact that the Jewish immigrants lived and worked there. It's neighbours give us no indication that the area would have seen the same success if Israel hadn't been created.

That creation is due to the Israelis, both Arab but mostly Jewish. And that creation is theirs, regardless of the piece of rock is sits on.

Why does a religion have the right to a country? Many religions do not have countries. And why does that supposed right mean they can take a country by force and expand it by force?
Two things: They didn't take a country by force, they were given it by the rulers at the time, without consent of the other people there - though the original plan gave those people plenty of space for themselves. They expanded it, which I'm not happy about - but they did so after wars that the other side started.

The second, and infintely more important, thing is that all that crap happened many decades ago. Getting hung up on that shit is not helping anyone. Fact is that Israel is there and there to stay. Regardless of the original justifications, there are millions of people who have their homes there. These people have a right to those homes and their lives.

All this "Jews vs Arab" stuff is irrelevant. It's politicians on both sides, who have to deal with the real world in real conditions.

Mmhh.. the Golan heights are also one of the best water sources in the area (it snows on Golan in winter!).
Well, how much water is actually produced there and used by Israel?

And would that stuff have been known and considered all those years ago when Israel occupied them and decided not to let the Syrians put their guns there again?

I agree, but the Germans could if they wanted.
Yeah, but that'd cost money, and no politician is going to make the budget deficit worse by spending it when you can gain more votes by spending it on other things.

Well, no. Tornados come in three variants:
IDS (interdiction and deep strike - basically a bomber, similar to CCCP's Su-24 and USA's F-111)
ECR (anti-radar missile platform)
ADV (air defence variant, meant for CAP, carries 4 long-range radar missiles like the Skyflash, the AMRAAM and the Aspide Mk.2 plus some IR missiles).
Check at http://www.fas.org
As I said, the Luftwaffe's Tornados are very specific types, doing very specific things.
They have IDS and ECR versions, but only the ECR's have actually been used during SEAD sorties over Kosovo.

As for air "superiority" fighters, the Luftwaffe has modified Phantoms until those are replaced by the Eurofighters. That job was meant to be done by the USAF, with its huge bases.

The PzH2000 is a more stealthy way of delivering warheads than by bomber aircrafts, though. It is a great tactical support for Panzer and Panzergrenadier brigades, and cannot be engaged by FlAK.
Well, I guess they have their uses in a traditional tank warfare scenario. Not that the Bundeswehr is actually going to engage in that sort of thing any time soon.

Oops. I totally forgot about the Leclerc. Not as powerful as the Leo2A6, though.
It's got that autoloader and good electronics though.

The Saudis (i.e. the ruling clan) are not considered Arabs by Arabs, not even by the inhabitants of the country that bears their name.
I see you cannot tell who is an arab then. Too bad.


What Jews allegedly feel is not relevant. And Jewish cultural heritage is just the mockery of the high cultures they encountered in the last two and a half millennia. What have Jews really given to the world except a distorted perspective of a more ancient god.
Don't you think Israel and Jews abroad could say the same thing about Palestinians and Arabs? So, are we going to have Israel and Palestine talk it over or are we wishing for a war? I bet you ARE wishing for a war. Be warned that in a war, it's the Palestinians the ones who are going to be utterly destroyed. Is that what you want?

You know nothing about Egyptian history and your evangelical lore is trash. There is not a single source to confirm any Jewish claim about biblical monotheism prior to the return from the Babylonian Exile.
Have you ever tried reading the Exodus? Also Auerbach gives good hints.

Jews are already god-forsaken.
This sentence looks like plain racism to me.

And they could only be shipped to an island if it is unpopulated, otherwise they would just do the same to the islanders they now do to the Arabs/Palestinians. What do you expect of people who take pride in the biblical narrative of Joshua conquering and slaughtering Canaan? And in Elijah killing non-believers (in a Jewish view) by the hundreds.
When Islam first spread it was very well received by most, since it gave answers Judaism and Christiany fail to give, especially in daily life and in state matters.
Same goes for people much-celebrated by Arabs, like Suleyman, Saladin, Muhammad II, Lawrence etc. And Islam was spread also by wars, so no alleged moral superiority of Islam. Again, read some European history.

Germany did not even exist as a real political entity prior to 1870. Go read a history book.
The fact that Germany became a unified country in 1870 doesn't mean Germany didn't exist. There was a German people, a German language and a German culture. By the same measure, Alessandro Manzoni didn't write in Italian because there wasn't an Italian unified state yet. Go read something else than Wikipedia.

Jews/Israelis have always had only one interest in peace: their forced peace in Erez Yisrael as envisioned by the Zionist movement. Without Arabs or non-Jews. But due to their insufficient numbers and their subsequent inability to cleanse Palestine from the Arabs they have now changed to defining their borders (far inside Arab land) without any negotiation or compromise. A peace process never really existed. And don’t forget: Arabs are not the ones who have gone to a foreign land to create a state. The European Jews are the intruders, aggressors, and occupiers.
In order for a peace process to take place, you must have people willing to do peace on both sides. Since Palestinians voted (70%) for a party that calls for destruction of Israel (Hamas), I don't think there's a widespread call for peace from the Palestinians, either.


There is no real need to distinguish between Jews and Israelis here. "Israel" ist just a superficial renaming of Jewish immigrants from Europe. They are the same persons though.
Plain racism again. By same measure, all Arabs are members of Al-Qaida.

Alsacians were not forced to leave. And the German territorial losses were just because it was Germany that started and lost the wars WW1 and WW2.

No, they were annexed and lost properties. Germany didn't start WW1 as you would know if you ever tried to read some history.

You support Israel and Israel is a war crime.
Did you post that after I gave you the hint?
.

I do not support Israel war crimes. Oh, and by the way, I doubt that "Israel is a war crime" is a correct english form. Your knowledge of english is trash.

Frankly, I got sick of you. Your arguments are mostly racism, warmongering and plain falsehoods placed here to fuel hate towards Israel and the jews. You dare to tell me I'm supporting war crimes while you call for death and war against people you don't even know.

I try to have an objective, pro-peace point of view. I won't answer your posts anymore.

Two things: They didn't take a country by force, they were given it by the rulers at the time, without consent of the other people there - though the original plan gave those people plenty of space for themselves. They expanded it, which I'm not happy about - but they did so after wars that the other side started.

The second, and infintely more important, thing is that all that crap happened many decades ago. Getting hung up on that shit is not helping anyone. Fact is that Israel is there and there to stay. Regardless of the original justifications, there are millions of people who have their homes there. These people have a right to those homes and their lives.

All this "Jews vs Arab" stuff is irrelevant. It's politicians on both sides, who have to deal with the real world in real conditions.

I agree. It maybe was wrong to put a jewish state in palastine, but now this state exists for 60 years. You can't tell the Israelis living there that they have to move away and that they don't have any right to live there.

It would be the same, if Germany would take back lower slesia and tell the people, that this would be German land because it was German 60 years ago. Although there aren't any Germans iliving there today.

The fact that Israel is not a poor country like Syria or Lebanon is due to the will and the effort the Jewish immigrants put in. The fact that Israel can actually export food despite being essentially a bunch of arid rocks is due to the efforts of Israeli farmers. Why do you think the Ottomans and land owners were so willing to give it away?

Of course it wasn't literally "nothing", but the fact is that Israel is now a relatively successful country due to the fact that the Jewish immigrants lived and worked there. It's neighbours give us no indication that the area would have seen the same success if Israel hadn't been created.

Of course massive amounts of aid from the US have not hurt the Israeli development


Two things: They didn't take a country by force, they were given it by the rulers at the time, without consent of the other people there - though the original plan gave those people plenty of space for themselves. They expanded it, which I'm not happy about - but they did so after wars that the other side started.
If somebody steals from you and gives me what they steal, and I know it is stolen and stolen from you then do I have an obligation to give it back to you?

Incidently - they are STILL in the process of expanding Israel by putting more and more people in colonies outside Israel to create a justification to take chunks of the surrounding land. While killing anyone who tries to stop it. Kinda like an ongoing invasion.

The second, and infintely more important, thing is that all that crap happened many decades ago. Getting hung up on that shit is not helping anyone. Fact is that Israel is there and there to stay. Regardless of the original justifications, there are millions of people who have their homes there. These people have a right to those homes and their lives.
Given one of the most common arguements for Israel being whre it is is that over a thousand years ago it was run by the Jewish I think it is a bit rich to then say that as all this stuff happened 60 years ago it does not matter.

Unless you think the claim based on ownership waaaay back is total rubbish that is.

Well, how much water is actually produced there and used by Israel?

And would that stuff have been known and considered all those years ago when Israel occupied them and decided not to let the Syrians put their guns there again?

Really, I don't have any sources on both questions. Anyway, I think that water control in such an arid area is something anyone would like to have.

Of course massive amounts of aid from the US have not hurt the Israeli development
That much is true.

If somebody steals from you and gives me what they steal, and I know it is stolen and stolen from you then do I have an obligation to give it back to you?
Not if that something is my house! You act like these people don't live in the Middle East just as much as the Arabs do.

Incidently - they are STILL in the process of expanding Israel by putting more and more people in colonies outside Israel to create a justification to take chunks of the surrounding land. While killing anyone who tries to stop it. Kinda like an ongoing invasion.
Yeah, and I mentioned that previously. These are the efforts of lobby groups and I am saddened that the Israeli government is peddling to them.
At the same time however, Hamas has illustrated quite well that stopping or even removing the settlements isn't going to help Israel one bit.

Unless you think the claim based on ownership waaaay back is total rubbish that is.
Of course it is! These Jews today have nothing to do with the Israelites of milennia ago, and it would be silly to argue otherwise.
The claim to ownership is quite simple: They wanted to live there, so they moved there. They weren't being left alone, so they wanted borders to protect them. And since then they have lived there and made the place their own.

Yeah, but that'd cost money, and no politician is going to make the budget deficit worse by spending it when you can gain more votes by spending it on other things.

And I'm happy that Germany isn't likely to go to war again, since I live about 200 km south of Germany... Hooray for pan-european friendship!

They have IDS and ECR versions, but only the ECR's have actually been used during SEAD sorties over Kosovo. As for air "superiority" fighters, the Luftwaffe has modified Phantoms until those are replaced by the Eurofighters. That job was meant to be done by the USAF, with its huge bases.
Agree.
Also, talking about old planes, the Italian AF used F-104S/ASA for interception until a couple of years ago...

(The Leclerc)It's got that autoloader and good electronics though.
Oops, I might have offended France! Sorry! Pardon! I hope Mr.Chirac won't teach me a lesson about the Leclerc by having a Leclerc shelling my car!;)

Not if that something is my house! You act like these people don't live in the Middle East just as much as the Arabs do.
Do you mean if somebody steals your house/land and gives it to me I should or should not return it?

Does the same apply to the palastinians who had land nicked?


Of course it is! These Jews today have nothing to do with the Israelites of milennia ago, and it would be silly to argue otherwise.
The claim to ownership is quite simple: They wanted to live there, so they moved there. They weren't being left alone, so they wanted borders to protect them. And since then they have lived there and made the place their own.
Fair enough. Some find it odd, but I think this is the only morally consistant claim to Israel. They wanted it, they took it, it's theirs.

Do you mean if somebody steals your house/land and gives it to me I should or should not return it?
Well, obviously you should. But that doesn't mean that you would actually be able to do so.
And if my children or grandchildren came along and tried to kick you out of that house, and you didn't have anywhere else to go, it's another issue again.

Does the same apply to the palastinians who had land nicked?
There are few Palestinians today who actually lost their land, namely farmers who had the security fence built through their fields and stuff. Those guys certainly deserve a much fairer compensation than they actually got (if they did get any at all).

The "refugees" today are generally the children or grandchildren of people who left their houses during the first war the Arabs started. They didn't expect the Israelis to win, so they thought they could just come back after a few weeks time. Turned out they were wrong. What exactly they felt during that time I don't know. Fact is however that it's ridiculous to argue that the 20 year old Palestinian has the right to kick some Israeli family out of their house because that land once belonged to his family.

If that were the case, some people might have to answer to a few thousand Native Americans.

There are few Palestinians today who actually lost their land, namely farmers who had the security fence built through their fields and stuff. Those guys certainly deserve a much fairer compensation than they actually got (if they did get any at all).
They got turfed off their land into lands they have no connection with. Then the people who kicked them off build settlements on the land they got kicked into. So i don't think there was much compensation


The "refugees" today are generally the children or grandchildren of people who left their houses during the first war the Arabs started. They didn't expect the Israelis to win, so they thought they could just come back after a few weeks time. Turned out they were wrong. What exactly they felt during that time I don't know. Fact is however that it's ridiculous to argue that the 20 year old Palestinian has the right to kick some Israeli family out of their house because that land once belonged to his family.

Of course fear of being exterminated played no part in the refugees leaving...

Linkey (http://www.deiryassin.org/mh2001.html) (Ok, it's baised, but the core of the massacre is fair enough)

BTW - If a 60 year old palastinian made a claim should he/she be given their land?

Because?

Always the conspiracy theories. The Israelis have politicians and public opinion like any other country. That's what I meant to show with my posts. There is no conspiracy to commit a massive land grab, and Israel has only to gain from seeing a stable Palestinian State formed.


A conspiracy? Its policy. Or was the increased building around East Jerusalem a natural phenomena? Plus I read recently theres a plan to recognise the illegal outposts in the west bank(Washington Post, I think). Theres nothing 'conspiratorial', mysterious or cabalistic. Its an attempt to grab as much of the West Bank as is deemed viable, along with Arab East Jerusalem, in a unilateral move.

A conspiracy? Its policy. Or was the increased building around East Jerusalem a natural phenomena? Plus I read recently theres a plan to recognise the illegal outposts in the west bank(Washington Post, I think). Theres nothing 'conspiratorial', mysterious or cabalistic. Its an attempt to grab as much of the West Bank as is deemed viable, along with Arab East Jerusalem, in a unilateral move.

After how the Palestinians responded to the Gaza pullout, can you really blame the Israelis?

In all honesty the way the Palestinians govern, I wouldn't trust them with an acre of corn.

There's going to be a Civil War in Gaza very soon. Some say it has already started.