NationStates Jolt Archive

You'll remember the whole German ship vs Israeli jet issue from a few weeks back.

Well, guess what...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6131458.stm
French nearly fired at Israelis

French troops serving in Lebanon have been only seconds away from firing on Israeli aircraft, the French defence minister says.

Michele Alliot-Marie told parliament the jets dived towards UN positions in October and were perceived as a threat.

"Two seconds later there would have been a shot against the aircraft which were directly menacing our forces," the defence minister said.

It's just so incredibly stupid. The French are not their enemies, for crying out loud!

You'll remember the whole German-ship vs Israeli jet issue from a few weeks back.

Well, guess what...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6131458.stm


It's just so incredibly stupid. The French are not their enemies, for crying out loud!

But they're french.


;)

Who else can Israel threaten?

If the IDF isn't careful, people are gonna get hurt.What do you mean? The IDF is always careful that people get hurt.
.

You'll remember the whole German ship vs Israeli jet issue from a few weeks back.

Well, guess what...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6131458.stm


It's just so incredibly stupid. The French are not their enemies, for crying out loud!


Neither were the UN - but they could try to stop them though, and that won't be allowed.

You'll remember the whole German ship vs Israeli jet issue from a few weeks back.

Well, guess what...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6131458.stm


It's just so incredibly stupid. The French are not their enemies, for crying out loud!
If these IAF aircraft were perceived as threats, why didn't the French fire? Two reasons I can think of. One, bad ROE. Two, not ready. Sounds like a lot of false bravado on the part of the French Defense Minister.

If these IAF aircraft were perceived as threats, why didn't the French fire? Two reasons I can think of. One, bad ROE. Two, not ready. Sounds like a lot of false bravado on the part of the French Defense Minister, to me, as well.

Either way, sooner or later the IDF will provoke people who are ready and react two seconds faster...

Either way, sooner or later the IDF will provoke people who are ready and react two seconds faster...

Maybe, but then the problem becomes hitting the target before the target hits you. On both sides.

Maybe, but then the problem becomes hitting the target before the target hits you. On both sides.

Not really. Given the current climate there, it's quite enough if someone actually does fire a shot.

Who else can Israel threaten?The Germans, the Danes or the Neds (holland) .. and those are not going to fire back.. even if fired upon.

If doubt Jews (IDF) will fire on the French.. the French would fire back.

If these IAF aircraft were perceived as threats, why didn't the French fire? good question.
the French have big mouths.. only talk so far.

Not really. Given the current climate there, it's quite enough if someone actually does fire a shot.

I was really thinking about it in a tactical sense, rather than as a political problem.

Something like
"Missile three o'clock, break right"
*chaff, chaff, flares, flares*
*watch missile overshoot*
*pull seat cushion out of asshole*
*fire HARM at RADAR*
*drop a few Rockeye after emitter shuts down*

I dont see the French chickening out like the Germans did.

The funniest line ive read all day! Thanks.

The funniest line ive read all day! Thanks.your welcome.

2 more thread are back up.. so you can have more fun. ;)

EDIT: I brough just one up (My title was overkill.. and I cant change it)
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=505242

The Germans, the Danes or the Neds (holland) .. and those are not going to fire back.. even if fired upon.

If doubt Jews (IDF) will fire on the French.. the French would fire back.

Over their shoulders, or what..? :confused:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." General George S. Patton.


"Going to war without France is like going deer hunting without your accordion." Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.

"We can stand here like the French, or we can do something about it." �Marge Simpson

"What do you expect from a culture and a nation that exerted more of its national will fighting against Disney World and Big Macs than the Nazis?" �Dennis Miller.

"It is important to remember that the French have always been there when they needed us." �Alan Kent


"Somebody was telling me about the French Army rifle that was being advertised on eBay the other day -- the description was, 'Never shot. Dropped once.'" Rep. Roy Blunt (MO)


"The French will only agree to go to war when we've proven we've found truffles in Iraq." Dennis Miller

Raise your right hand if you like the French ... raise both hands if you are French.

Q. What did the mayor of Paris say to the German Army as they entered the city in WWII?

A. Table for 100,000 m'sieur?


"Do you know how many Frenchmen it takes to defend Paris? �It's not known, it's never been tried." Rep. R. Blount (MO)


"Do you know it only took Germany three days to conquer France in WWII? �And that's because it was raining." John Xereas, Manager, DC Improv.


The AP and UPI reported that the French Government announced after the London bombings that it has raised its terror alert level from Run to Hide. The only two higher levels in France are Surrender and Collaborate. The rise in the alert level was precipitated by a recent fire which destroyed France's white flag factory, effectively disabling their military.

French Ban Fireworks at Euro Disney

(AP), Paris, March 5, 2003

The French Government announced today that it is imposing a ban on the use of fireworks at Euro Disney. The decision comes the day after a nightly fireworks display at the park, located just 30 miles outside of Paris, caused the soldiers at a nearby French Army garrison to surrender to a group of Czech tourists.

:gundge:
:gundge:
:D

*snip francophobic silliness*I hate to break it to you, but all of those jokes have been used here and on every other corner of the internet about 3 billion times for the past ten years or so.

Just a note on the effectiveness of SAMs, they rarely score kills againsts aircraft. Any aircraft should be able to outmaneuver a SAM due to a combination of countermeasures and the fact that the aircraft's control surfaces have a much larger area than the missile's giving it greater maneuverability.

During both of the Gulf Wars, Saddam was equipped with a great air defense network. He still only was able to shoot down only a few aircrat. 95+% of the time, the SAM will miss.

I hate to break it to you, but all of those jokes have been used here and on every other corner of the internet about 3 billion times for the past ten years or so.

I dunno, the fireworks one was pretty funny.

I hate to break it to you, but all of those jokes have been used here and on every other corner of the internet about 3 billion times for the past ten years or so.

If I thought repitition was a problem, Your highness, I'd have googled and searched just to make sure you'd never seen it before.. :rolleyes:

Oh, wait.. I did google.. because I wanted the flag factory joke. And the others were just too good to pass up :D

However, if you'd like to send me a log of everything you've ever seen on the Internets, I'll be sure to post a warning or something like that so that your precious feelings aren't in anyway disturbed. Or would that remove the rocking horse of your superiority..?

I dunno, the fireworks one was pretty funny.

Me to :D

It was a new one on me.. I was actually only looking for the flag joke - which is just priceless in it's longer format

*quoted Lydiardia's francophobic silliness*

those jokes have been used here and on every other corner of the internet about 3 billion times for the past ten years or so.Yeah.. hitting the same (dead horse) French jokes.. again and again and again.

I dunno, the fireworks one was pretty funny.

I think that was the one I hadn't heard.

If these IAF aircraft were perceived as threats, why didn't the French fire? Two reasons I can think of. One, bad ROE. Two, not ready. Sounds like a lot of false bravado on the part of the French Defense Minister.Or the fact that the Israelis are the only viable airforce in the region and shooting at them could cause dire consequences?

Just a note on the effectiveness of SAMs, they rarely score kills againsts aircraft. Any aircraft should be able to outmaneuver a SAM due to a combination of countermeasures and the fact that the aircraft's control surfaces have a much larger area than the missile's giving it greater maneuverability.

During both of the Gulf Wars, Saddam was equipped with a great air defense network. He still only was able to shoot down only a few aircrat. 95+% of the time, the SAM will miss.I'm pretty sure simply shooting at the jets would cause enough problems. They wouldn't need to shoot them down.

*snip*Gosh, if the French are this cowardly, how cowardly must Americans be?
Consider that we cut and ran from Lebanon when we got hit while the French stayed after they were bombed.

Gosh, if the French are this cowardly, how cowardly must Americans be?
Consider that we cut and ran from Lebanon when we got hit while the French stayed after they were bombed.

Uh.. Lebanon was a french protectorate. They had an obligation to stay (yeah, who knows why they chose that one to start standing on principle on..). The US, however, is NOT the World's Policeman. Contrary to popular belief in Africa and Asia. If America wants to pick and chose her conflicts then good luck to her I say.. But not where she has an obligation (which would pretty much be Liberia and maybe Panama). Oh, and Costa Rica.

Because of her geographical location, America will always have a fine line to tread between being isolationist, or "uncaring", or over involved.. Depending on who's slinging the mud and what axe they have to grind.

And that's the opinion of a non-US citizen :)

Who else can Israel threaten?

Hm... uh... I GOT IT! They can threaten the Penguins! :D

Well consider that the french ran from just about every encounter in the french indonesian war and decided to run out of the country after dien bien phu and their greatest victory in the 100 year war was because of a 14 year old girl.

Uh.. Lebanon was a french protectorate. They had an obligation to stay (yeah, who knows why they chose that one to start standing on principle on..). The US, however, is NOT the World's Policeman. Contrary to popular belief in Africa and Asia. If America wants to pick and chose her conflicts then good luck to her I say.. But not where she has an obligation (which would pretty much be Liberia and maybe Panama). Oh, and Costa Rica.

Because of her geographical location, America will always have a fine line to tread between being isolationist, or "uncaring", or over involved.. Depending on who's slinging the mud and what axe they have to grind.

And that's the opinion of a non-US citizen :)Remember, Lebanon was an independent nation by this time. Both were there on UN business.

Well consider that the french ran from just about every encounter in the french indonesian war and decided to run out of the country after dien bien phu and their greatest victory in the 100 year war was because of a 14 year old girl.Consider, as I've stated before, that Americans are technically even more cowardly than the French, when in the same situation.

[QUOTE=Laerod;11924438]Remember, Lebanon was an independent nation by this time. Both were there on UN business.


Good point... Maybe I should have said the french had a moral obligation and the US, only a UN one.. (although a UN obligation is a contradiction in terms, since the UN is a voluntary organisation).

The IDF is in the business of hurting people, anyone really, preferably muslims though.

They've been known to run over an american woman with a bulldozer and shoot little kids, as well as bomb UN peacekeeprs.

Why would this be any different?

The IDF is in the business of hurting people, anyone really, preferably muslims though.

They've been known to run over an american woman with a bulldozer and shoot little kids, as well as bomb UN peacekeeprs.

Why would this be any different?

The American woman was a human shield guarding arms smuggling tunnels. Good riddance to bad rubbish. Too bad her family is still alive. Those money grubbing bastards tried to make a few bucks off the death of their little terrorist by sueing Catterpillar.

The Palestinians have been caught faking civilian casualties, including children. The Palestinians have been caught sending kids with toy guns over to play near IDF outposts. Still everyone's way too ready to believe that IDF soldiers love killing kids. That's about the same as someone saying all muslims are terrorists, but comments about the IDF are politically correct.

The Jews actually invent new products ... you saying we allow the Jews to murder (claiming it was collateral/accident/whatever) ten Palestinean/Lebanese Child for every new product?
...
The American woman was a human shield guarding arms smuggling tunnels. Good riddance to bad rubbish. Too bad her family is still alive. Those money grubbing bastards tried to make a few bucks off the death of their little terrorist by sueing Catterpillar.ok how about the Jews get to murder one American Woman for every new product.

does that satisfy you bloodlust?

does that satisfy you bloodlust?
There are no bloodlust, only will to stay alive. at least not where you are looking.
the palastinians are the one which had terrorists rally of celebrations when an israeli killed. those rallies supported by the majority of them, although not all of them.

you saying we allow the Jews to murder (claiming it was collateral/accident/whatever) ten Palestinean/Lebanese Child for every new product?
...
ok how about the Jews get to murder one American Woman for every new product.

does that satisfy you bloodlust?

OK, the first quote was in response to a hypothetical situation mentioned by one of your fellow scumbag nazis. The second quote has nothing to do with the first. It's a damn shame you couldn't figure that out on your own.

There are no bloodlust..
He is gloating about that pacifist woman killed by the Jews(IDF).. Maybe if i use red you can see it.

The American woman was a human shield guarding arms smuggling tunnels. Good riddance to bad rubbish. Too bad her family is still alive. Those money grubbing bastards tried to make a few bucks off the death of their little terrorist by sueing Catterpillar.

in my book.. gloating about an unarmed pacifist woman being killed (following army orders..) is Bloodlust.

He is gloating about that pacifist woman killed by the Jews.. Maybe if i use red you can see it.



in my book.. gloating about an unarmed woman being killed.. is Bloodlust.

Of course you're innocent of that. You just back groups like Hezbollah, who have made it their policy to kill Jews anywhere in the world. How come you never responded to my posts in previous threads about Hezbollah bombing a Jewish community center in Buenos Aires? I guess the deaths of Jewish civilians anywhere is justified in your eyes.

He is gloating about that pacifist woman killed by the Jews.. Maybe if i use red you can see it.
in my book.. gloating about an unarmed woman being killed.. is Bloodlust.

Unless it's the leader of Hezbollah calling for all Jews to come to Isreal because it would be easier to kill them that way. Or Hamas leaders calling for strikes on America because of IDF actions. Right? Then it's perfectly justifiable.

Of course you're innocent of that.I am not like you sir.
not at all.

you make me sick.

I am not like you sir.
not at all.

you make me sick.

Now it's time for dodgeball.

He is gloating about that pacifist woman killed by the Jews(IDF).. Maybe if i use red you can see it.



in my book.. gloating about an unarmed woman being killed (following army orders..) is Bloodlust.
if this was one time usage I wouldn't stop to post.
still, it all depend on the question: was she a pacifist or terrorist's defender. It can change the picture. anyway, I think her case was just another accident as what happened in gaza.

Unless it's the leader of Hezbollah calling for all Jews to come to Isreal because it would be easier to kill them that way. Or Hamas leaders calling for strikes on America because of IDF actions. Right? Then it's perfectly justifiable.dont be silly.
that rethoric is not Justifiable.

I am not like you sir.
not at all.

you make me sick.

No, you're worse. You back people who are actually advocating genocide while I discussed genocide in a hypothetical context. You are far inferior to me and I'd be insulted if anyone compared a scumbag like you to me.

dont be silly.
that rethoric is not Justifiable.

And yet you have defended and supported every action by the very leaders and groups that make these statements.

dp

.. you have defended and supported every (Hezbollah) action ..I challenge you to prove it.

still, it all depend on the question: was she a pacifist or terrorist's defender. It can change the picture. anyway, I think her case was just another accident as what happened in gaza.

Like I said..
You can kill lots of pacifist women..
You can kill lots of Palestinean/Lebanese Children
-Its all rigth- as long as you say the magic words: "regretful" "accident" and/or "colateral" rigth after the kill. [/massive sarcasm]

I challenge you to prove it.

Now we get into the denial game. Shock, surprise, unprecendented. Please puppy, I'm not going to dance around looking for threads and posts by you. Since you're now attempting to deny it, it makes you look even more pathetic in your unwavering support of those who advocate committing genocide.

Just a note on the effectiveness of SAMs, they rarely score kills againsts aircraft. Any aircraft should be able to outmaneuver a SAM due to a combination of countermeasures and the fact that the aircraft's control surfaces have a much larger area than the missile's giving it greater maneuverability.

During both of the Gulf Wars, Saddam was equipped with a great air defense network. He still only was able to shoot down only a few aircrat. 95+% of the time, the SAM will miss.

What reservoir of experience do you base that comment upon? I'm sure that many Anti-Air Warfare types would argue against your viewpoint long and loud.

What reservoir of experience do you base that comment upon? I'm sure that many Anti-Air Warfare types would argue against your viewpoint long and loud.

He's actually pretty close w/ the equipment being used. State of the art tech has a better chance but the odds are still low. A 10-20% hit rate by SAM systems is considered good.

Since you're now attempting to deny it, it makes you look even more pathetic in your unwavering support of those who advocate committing genocide.You got the wrong person sir.
or are you talking about DCD?
he is the only one who seems to think "we must comit Genocide to solve Israel problems."

I'm saying that if we were to decide to kill of all the Arabs or all the Jews I'd say kill the Arabs.

You got the wrong person sir.
or are you talking about DCD?
he is the only one who seems to think "we must comit Genocide to solve Israel problems."

Nope, it's you. And, as usual, you try to pathetically take words out of context to avoid the facts.

Keep dancing.

You got the wrong person sir.
or are you talking about DCD?
he is the only one who seems to think "we must comit Genocide to solve Israel problems."

Once again since you appear to be somewhat slow. I was responding to a HYPOTHETICAL argument.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&defl=en&q=define:hypothetical&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title

I hope this clears things up. If you need further help, just get your special ed teacher to post a request for further information.

Like I said..
You can kill lots of pacifist women..
You can kill lots of Palestinean/Lebanese Children
-Its all rigth- as long as you say the magic words: "regretful" "accident" and/or "colateral" rigth after the kill. [/massive sarcasm]

you know, in courts you would need to prove intent in order to rise from killing, accident or "coleteral dammage" to murder, mascare or every other name you will invent.

this isn't intentional killing, and there are more proves that israel tried to avoid it, than encouraging it.
on the other note, the palastinians celebrate "succesful" terror attacks and their speaches, acts and money used to grow more suicide bombers, missle launchers and other terrorists.

I said it before, and I keep saying it, look at YOUR side.

he is the only one who seems to think "we must comit Genocide to solve Israel problems."

while you only for jenocide in order to solve "the israeli problem" (like the "jewish problem of the nazis).

Nope, it's you.use the Quote functions to prove it.

I did prove who clearly advocated for Genocide, here ill do it again:
I'm saying that if we were to decide to kill of all the Arabs or all the Jews I'd say kill the Arabs.

you know, in courts you would need to prove intent in order to rise from killing, accident or "coleteral dammage" to murder, mascare or every other name you will invent.

this isn't intentional killing, and there are more proves that israel tried to avoid it, than encouraging it. intersting..

can you show us those "proves".. whatever they are.

while you only for jenocide in order to solve "the israeli problem" (like the "jewish problem of the nazis).I thing you should try to repost that.. its a bit off the "english language" mark. (in another words.. I am not sure I understand the full meaning of you post)

use the Quote functions to prove it.

I did prove who clearly advocated for Genocide, here ill do it again:

No, you really didn't. You took a comment out of context. You've only proven that you're a dishonest scumbag. Congratulations.

You're getting off on all this attention. Mommy and daddy don't seem to have enough time for you. Glad I could help.

intersting..

can you show us those "proves".. whatever they are.

can you prove there was intent?
IDF checked himself constantly, especially after such accidents. former soldiers which were responsible to such accidents punished by the army.
hypotethicaly, IF israel had intent to kill the palastinians (or if it wasn't us but the french or the russians), they won't stay at live until now. occuption is never good to the occupied populace, but historically speaking, it is one of the more tolerant occuptions in the last centuaries.

No, you really didn't. You took a comment out of context. The old "
:( "..But.. but You took me out of context" lame excuse.

so..Inow show you the full context.. your full post.. and the post you were replying to:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11924537&postcount=115
I'm saying that if we were to decide to kill of all the Arabs or all the Jews I'd say kill the Arabs.
Now if you want to talk about murder, the Palestinians are the ones who commit murder most frequently by targeting civilians. Murder and accidental death are two very different things. I wouldn't expect you to know that though.

I thing you should try to repost that.. its a bit off the "english language" mark. (in another words.. I am not sure I understand the full meaning of you post)
in other words, you "forgot" the holocust argued by the nazis as "answer" to the "jewish problem"- in their words, not mine.

The old "
:( "..But.. but You took me out of context" lame excuse.

so..Inow show you the full context.. your full post.. and the post you were replying to:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11924537&postcount=115
Why don't you post the original comment by Sovietstan and my response to it? You're starting in the middle. In other words, you're a liar. You're selling bullshit and you've got a keyboard full of free samples.

Sorry kid, I and everyone else on this forum see through your act. Hope you enjoy all this attention though.

The old "
:( "..But.. but You took me out of context" lame excuse.

so..Inow show you the full context.. your full post.. and the post you were replying to:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11924537&postcount=115
"if we were to decide to kill of all the Arabs or all the Jews"
do you need more proves to the hypothetical contest of his post, or you still try to play dumb?

"if we were to decide to kill of all the Arabs or all the Jews"
do you need more proves to the hypothetical contest of his post, or you still try to play dumb?

Be nice. The kid needs the attention. Mommy and Daddy ignore him at home.

use the Quote functions to prove it.

I did prove who clearly advocated for Genocide, here ill do it again:

God this is sad. Of course you refuse to highlight the rest of the quote in your nice little red or quote what he was responding to. I guess using red makes it more true in your world?

You can squeel "prove it" all you want. You know your history as well as we do. Just keep being as disingenous as you usually are as you dance around.

Why don't you post the original comment by Sovietstan and my response to it? (Damn DCD soon he is going to ask me to post the entire thread)
maybe you are talking about this one.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11924376&postcount=105

(QUOTE=Soviestan
Simply because jews are over represented in government and control of wealth doesnt mean we would collapse without them./QUOTE)
In what government on earth are Jews overrepresented? You're just a fucking ignorant antisemite. I hope your family dies in an al qaeda bombing.
...
WOW.
on my book family members of fellow posters are off limits.

you are lucky Sovietstan did not take you all the way to moderation.
For your information you are not allowed to get personal.
Since Sovietstan did not see this agravating post.. I will take you to moderation on this.
Unless you retract AND apologize to his family.

Can't meander this thread back to the topic at hand, no?

Does anyone think there could be a confrontation?

Possible fallout from it?

(Damn DCD soon he is going to ask me to post the entire thread)
maybe you are talking about this one.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11924376&postcount=105


...
WOW.
on my book family members of fellow posters are off limits.

you are lucky Sovietstan did not take you all the way to moderation.
For your information you are not allowed to get personal.
Since Sovietstan did not see this agravating post.. I will take you to moderation on this.
Unless you retract AND apologize to his family.


No, I mean the one where Sovietstan seriously advocated killing all the Jews as a solution to the Israel/palestine problem and I responded that IF genocide were to happen it should be the Arabs to go.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11924376&postcount=105


...
WOW.
on my book family members of fellow posters are off limits.

you are lucky Sovietstan did not take you all the way to moderation.
For your information you are not allowed to get personal.
Since Sovietstan did not see this agravating post.. I will take you to moderation on this.
Unless you retract AND apologize to his family.

your time is running out DCD.

your time is running out DCD.

Post edited http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11924376&postcount=105

Sovietstan, I'm sorry for wishing for a terrorist attack on your family. I still think you're an antisemite though.

Post edited http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11924376&postcount=105

Sovietstan, I'm sorry for wishing for a terrorist attack on your family. I still think you're an antisemite though.thank you DCD..
my turn.. I am sorry for hunting you down on that one post you made..

logging out now

Can't meander this thread back to the topic at hand, no?

Does anyone think there could be a confrontation?

Possible fallout from it?

I was just wondering the same thing :rolleyes:

Not that a little flame war doesn't make the afternoon lighter, but still..

thank you DCD..
my turn.. I am sorry for hunting you down on that one post you made..

logging out now

Apologizing is for the weak.

The Germans, the Danes or the Neds (holland) .. and those are not going to fire back.. even if fired upon.

If doubt Jews (IDF) will fire on the French.. the French would fire back.
I've always thought you were an incredibly stupid person but this time:rolleyes: There are no Dutch troops in Lebanon and they won't be going either. The Danes are there, with only two ships.
And you can count on it the Germans, Danes and/or the Dutch will return fire. They might not be the type 'shoot first, ask questions later', like you are but they're not stupid.

I challenge you to prove it.
I remember too, you do indeed take the side of Hezobollah. Though at least you deny the fact that they're a terrorist group.

Apologizing is for the weak.

Getting permanently banned from the forum is for the stupid. I've fucked up enough in here that any big infraction will end up getting me kicked off for good. Then I'd actually have to work here at work.

Getting permanently banned from the forum is for the stupid. I've fucked up enough in here that any big infraction will end up getting me kicked off for good. Then I'd actually have to work here at work.

So in fact, you didn't say you were sorry and edited your post because you meant it, but because it was a threat to your account? In that case it was not really an apology, now was it ;).

That's why I directed my post at Ocean, instead of at you.

The American woman was a human shield guarding arms smuggling tunnels. Good riddance to bad rubbish. Too bad her family is still alive. Those money grubbing bastards tried to make a few bucks off the death of their little terrorist by sueing Catterpillar..

Would you care to show the articles relating to this that show she was guarding smuggling tunnels when killed?

On what grounds do you refer to this woman as a "little terrorist"?

And is it on some religous basis that you wish her family ill as well?


IDF checked himself constantly, especially after such accidents. former soldiers which were responsible to such accidents punished by the army.


Its the exception rather than the rule.

Nope, it's you. And, as usual, you try to pathetically take words out of context to avoid the facts.

Keep dancing.

You're the one who made the accusation. You're the one who has to back it up.



this isn't intentional killing, and there are more proves that israel tried to avoid it, than encouraging it.


Accully, there's a great deal of evidence of Israli negligence or intentional disregard for civilian life. The useing of civilian human sheilds, bombings of high poulation density areas, brutal repression of civilian populations in occupied areas, and so forth.

Not that I'm on the side of Hezbollah or the suicide bombers. I'm certainly not. Just saying that there's a great deal of blood on Israel's hands as well.

The simple fact that Israel kills 4 times as many civilians as alledged terrorists shows that there's something wrong.





In responce to the origonal post:

Israel has never been known for showing regard for their allies. Durring the Six Day War an American destroyer flying American flags at sea in the Medditeranian was attacked and sunk by Israli fighters, dispite repeated hails on American and Israli frequencies.

No, I mean the one where Sovietstan seriously advocated killing all the Jews as a solution to the Israel/palestine problem and I responded that IF genocide were to happen it should be the Arabs to go.

Out of curiosity, why?

The Arabs were there first, and there are many more Arabs. Why do the Jews get the claim to the land?

Just so that no one comes back to this in a few months, I don't advocate genocide of any race. And I understand that neither does DCD.

Would you care to show the articles relating to this that show she was guarding smuggling tunnels when killed?

On what grounds do you refer to this woman as a "little terrorist"?

And is it on some religous basis that you wish her family ill as well?



Its the exception rather than the rule.

Rachel Corrie (April 10, 1979 – March 16, 2003) was a member of the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) who traveled as an activist to the Gaza Strip during the Al-Aqsa Intifada. She was killed when she tried to obstruct an Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Caterpillar D9 bulldozer operating in a Palestinian residential area of Rafah, next to the border with Egypt - an area the IDF had designated a security zone and which contains a network of smuggling tunnels connecting Egypt to the Palestinian side of Rafah.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Corrie

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

Corrie was not guarding tunnels when she was killed. No tunnell was found and according to the IDF they were not in fact looking for tunnells on that occassion ("searching for explosives in the border area designated a security zone" from your wikipedia link) . In fact according to your wikipedia the house is being rebuilt.

You havent explained your "little terrorist" remark, nor why you wish that her family were killed.

Out of curiosity, why?

The Arabs were there first, and there are many more Arabs. Why do the Jews get the claim to the land?

Just so that no one comes back to this in a few months, I don't advocate genocide of any race. And I understand that neither does DCD.

It has nothing to do with any claim to the land. I just think the Jews, Israeli and non-Israeli, tend to support democracy and western values more than the Arabs do. Granted that's a generalization and there are scumbags among the Jews and decent people among the Arabs. Plus the Jews contribute more to science and technology. They're less expendable. It's kind of a cruel argument, but then again, it's only a hypothetical argument.

Corrie was not guarding tunnels when she was killed. No tunnell was found and according to the IDF they were not in fact looking for tunnells on that occassion ("searching for explosives in the border area designated a security zone" from your wikipedia link) . In fact according to your wikipedia the house is being rebuilt.

You havent explained your "little terrorist" remark, nor why you wish that her family were killed.

I was under the impression that she was trying to keep the Israelis from destroying tunnels that were used to arm terrorists. In my book that makes her one of the terrorists. As for her family, no, I don't have any religious basis for wishing them harm.

Regardless of what may or may not happen. If given a choice, Israel vs the UN or Israel vs the French. I'm pretty sure that the USA would back up Israel. The UN and the French, in my opinion, are nothing more than terrorist supporters.

"Bin Laden, please sit at my table and lets talk" UN

A Freedom Fries thread combined with a "Fuck the Sand N*****s" special. I bet Busheviks and Kahanists are feeling all warm and tingly here.

Then again, I suppose they need some comfort in the aftermath of November 7th.

:D

No, I mean the one where Sovietstan seriously advocated killing all the Jews as a solution to the Israel/palestine problem and I responded that IF genocide were to happen it should be the Arabs to go.

And I was saying that if genocide were to happen I perfer it be the jews. There are far less of them than Muslims or Arabs. btw, I didnt appreciate the remark about my family being bombed.

Well the fact remains that many generations of Israelis were taught basically that 'After the holocaust, the Jews needed a new home so they went to a uninhabited desert called Palestine, and they made the desert bloom', and if their ever was any mention of the Palestinians it was 'Oh and their were some people who didn't like it, but only because they hated Jews'.

The Israeli government has deliberately educated it's people ignorant, it is a state more belligerant and expansionist than Nazi Germany, and it has racist politicians that want to kick all Arabs out of Israel to make it homogenous. Zionism is a violent oppressive ideology that advocates the killing of innocent arabs for the territorial expansion of jewish colonies further and further into the West Bank.

Th IDF is guilty of war crimes in deliberately targetting civilians in Lebanon in order to incite fear in the population, it is nothing but state sanctioned terrorism, far worst than Hezbollah has ever done. Israel is also guilty of wars of aggression and expansion as defined at Nuremburg. The Jews are the problem.

The Israeli government has deliberately educated it's people ignorant, it is a state more belligerant and expansionist than Nazi Germany, and it has racist politicians that want to kick all Arabs out of Israel to make it homogenous. Zionism is a violent oppressive ideology that advocates the killing of innocent arabs for the territorial expansion of jewish colonies further and further into the West Bank.

If this is true- and I am in no way saying it is- then the Israeli government is one of the most facetious and hypocritical in history, especially in the light that they ban Kahane Chai.

Well the fact remains that many generations of Israelis were taught basically that 'After the holocaust, the Jews needed a new home so they went to a uninhabited desert called Palestine, and they made the desert bloom', and if their ever was any mention of the Palestinians it was 'Oh and their were some people who didn't like it, but only because they hated Jews'.

The Israeli government has deliberately educated it's people ignorant, it is a state more belligerant and expansionist than Nazi Germany, and it has racist politicians that want to kick all Arabs out of Israel to make it homogenous. Zionism is a violent oppressive ideology that advocates the killing of innocent arabs for the territorial expansion of jewish colonies further and further into the West Bank.

Th IDF is guilty of war crimes in deliberately targetting civilians in Lebanon in order to incite fear in the population, it is nothing but state sanctioned terrorism, far worst than Hezbollah has ever done. Israel is also guilty of wars of aggression and expansion as defined at Nuremburg. The Jews are the problem.

Can you give a source for any of this?

Well the fact remains that many generations of Israelis were taught basically that 'After the holocaust, the Jews needed a new home so they went to a uninhabited desert called Palestine, and they made the desert bloom', and if their ever was any mention of the Palestinians it was 'Oh and their were some people who didn't like it, but only because they hated Jews'.

The Israeli government has deliberately educated it's people ignorant, it is a state more belligerant and expansionist than Nazi Germany, and it has racist politicians that want to kick all Arabs out of Israel to make it homogenous. Zionism is a violent oppressive ideology that advocates the killing of innocent arabs for the territorial expansion of jewish colonies further and further into the West Bank.

Th IDF is guilty of war crimes in deliberately targetting civilians in Lebanon in order to incite fear in the population, it is nothing but state sanctioned terrorism, far worst than Hezbollah has ever done. Israel is also guilty of wars of aggression and expansion as defined at Nuremburg. The Jews are the problem.

Where's your source or evidence of such. If you know the facts then this should be an easy task.

Until then I will declare you a terrorist and extremist sympathizer.

To me you sound more in support to Hezbollah than Israel.

I ask again, provide evidence to your claims. I will NOT take your words for it.

I ask again, provide evidence to your claims. I will NOT take your words for it.

I don't think anyone actually cares about your opinion anyway.

Well the fact remains that many generations of Israelis were taught basically that 'After the holocaust, the Jews needed a new home so they went to a uninhabited desert called Palestine, and they made the desert bloom', and if their ever was any mention of the Palestinians it was 'Oh and their were some people who didn't like it, but only because they hated Jews'.

The Israeli government has deliberately educated it's people ignorant, it is a state more belligerant and expansionist than Nazi Germany, and it has racist politicians that want to kick all Arabs out of Israel to make it homogenous. Zionism is a violent oppressive ideology that advocates the killing of innocent arabs for the territorial expansion of jewish colonies further and further into the West Bank.

Th IDF is guilty of war crimes in deliberately targetting civilians in Lebanon in order to incite fear in the population, it is nothing but state sanctioned terrorism, far worst than Hezbollah has ever done. Israel is also guilty of wars of aggression and expansion as defined at Nuremburg. The Jews are the problem.

Yep. In addition Israel as in the past advanced on Syria through the Golan Heights to get them to attack. Then Israel would use that to attack claiming self-defence.

I was under the impression that she was trying to keep the Israelis from destroying tunnels that were used to arm terrorists. In my book that makes her one of the terrorists. As for her family, no, I don't have any religious basis for wishing them harm.

So as there were no tunnells on that occassion, nor were they looking for any at the time, you would accept the fact that (a) you were incorrect and (b) she was not a "terrorist"?

Precisely what you think of your own statement re her family is something you can ruminate on the next time you begin talking about "terrorists".

Are you denying that Israeli has race laws? I hope not.

ISF war crimes are pretty clear, numerous human rights groups and the like who travelled to Beirut and other places confirmed the attacks were deliberately targetting civilians, carpet bombing basically. For current war crimes:
http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2006/s1785161.htm

And yes most Israelis were educated in this way and still are, it is only through foreign education that they can access differing opinions, and even in the US their are rich pro-Israel lobbies who try to suppress any pro-Palestinian viewpoints or indeed to reveal IDF war crimes and the fascist nature of the Israel govt.
For current evidence of this, although Israeli racism has been around for years.
http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2006/s1781128.htm

I don't think anyone actually cares about your opinion anyway.

To be quite honest, I do NOT and will NOT care what people may think. As you and everybody else, I have a right to my opinion and feelings on issues. People may not like me since I may disagree with them but what fun is having a forum for debates if everybody agrees.

Also, please post on topic. Check the One Stop Rules. No thread hijacking, no flaming, no trolling, etc....

Can't meander this thread back to the topic at hand, no?

Does anyone think there could be a confrontation?

Possible fallout from it?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6133920.stm

For the moment the two simply say there was a 'misunderstanding'. But if it happens again, people are going to start getting really pissed off.

Can you give a source for any of this?

Actually if you read many of the middle east threads on this board you'll see that exact story. However -

"Hebrew-language geography books from the 1950s through 1970s focused on the glory of Israel’s ancient past and how the land was “neglected and destroyed” by the Arabs until the Jews returned from their forced exile and revived it “with the help of the Zionist movement.”

“This attitude served to justify the return of the Jews, implying that they care enough about the country to turn the swamps and deserts into blossoming farmland; this effectively delegitimizes the Arab claim to the same land,” Bar-Tal told the Washington Report. “The message was that the Palestinians were primitive and neglected the country and did not cultivate the land.”
http://www.mideastjournal.com/israelitextbooks6.html

For the moment the two simply say there was a 'misunderstanding'. But if it happens again, people are going to start getting really pissed off.

I get the feeling France is trying to re-assert herself as a dominant (and successful) leader in this area, especially after the debacle in Iraq. That's why I'm a little worried that they (out of all other forces in the area) will actually fire on a IAF plane violating the airspace.

Now, while they are well entitled to do that..... I don't see a good end scenario developing from that.

So as there were no tunnells on that occassion, nor were they looking for any at the time, you would accept the fact that (a) you were incorrect and (b) she was not a "terrorist"? Yeah, I guess I have to.

Precisely what you think of your own statement re her family is something you can ruminate on the next time you begin talking about "terrorists".Well I don't go around blowing up people's families. I get angry and I make angry statements.

Are you denying that Israeli has race laws? I hope not.

ISF war crimes are pretty clear, numerous human rights groups and the like who travelled to Beirut and other places confirmed the attacks were deliberately targetting civilians, carpet bombing basically. For current war crimes:
http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2006/s1785161.htm

And yes most Israelis were educated in this way and still are, it is only through foreign education that they can access differing opinions, and even in the US their are rich pro-Israel lobbies who try to suppress any pro-Palestinian viewpoints or indeed to reveal IDF war crimes and the fascist nature of the Israel govt.
For current evidence of this, although Israeli racism has been around for years.
http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2006/s1781128.htm

So are you claiming that Hezbollah weren't firing rockets from right behind schools, hospitals, and other populated areas like the cowards they are

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_segregation#Israel_and_Israeli-occupied_territories

Are you denying that Israeli has race laws? I hope not.

ISF war crimes are pretty clear, numerous human rights groups and the like who travelled to Beirut and other places confirmed the attacks were deliberately targetting civilians, carpet bombing basically. For current war crimes:
http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2006/s1785161.htm
That was one bombing, and it is claimed that it was a technical problem. Show me evidence that proves otherwise.

And yes most Israelis were educated in this way and still are, it is only through foreign education that they can access differing opinions, and even in the US their are rich pro-Israel lobbies who try to suppress any pro-Palestinian viewpoints or indeed to reveal IDF war crimes and the fascist nature of the Israel govt.
For current evidence of this, although Israeli racism has been around for years.
http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2006/s1781128.htm

That's about one racist Israeli politician, that does not generalize into every Israeli citizen, and funnily enough, that article contains several quotes from Jews expressing their opposition to his opinions.

That's why I'm a little worried that they (out of all other forces in the area) will actually fire on a IAF plane violating the airspace.
Well yeah, they'd be the most likely suspects. The French have never been afraid to speak their mind in matters like this, and judging from the state of the Ivorian Air Force, I'd argue that they're willing to walk the walk as well.

They probably don't want to fire on the Israelis, but they'd certainly see themselves in the right if they did it.

The thing is: Ultimately I can't even say anything bad about the Israeli overflights by themselves. I know they're not supposed to be doing it, but then Syria isn't supposed to be sending truckloads of weapons into Lebanon either. The fact that Assad just flat-out refused controls along that border should tell you something.

I just don't understand why the IDF thinks it has to try and intimidate people. Maybe they're really buying into the neocon jokes of weak and scared peacekeepers, as if the French had never seen a plane fly at them. If they would just keep doing the overflights, the French could more or less ignore them, and everybody could be happy.

So are you claiming that Hezbollah weren't firing rockets from right behind schools, hospitals, and other populated areas like the cowards they are

No, but I condone Hezbollah as a national resistance to Zionist imperialism, just as the Poles or Czechs paid for German living space (an identical policy) over 50 years ago. The Jews started the conflict by occupying Arab land because they thought they 'earnt' it via the holocaust, and they continue to kill Palestinians on a daily basis, the only reason rockets fire into Israel is because the land is not theres, they are occupying it.

And Pyotr, look at the wiki articles, and I have many many more about Israeli racism. And please look at Beirut Pyotr, and tell me no war crimes were done. A convoy of civilians cars were leaving Beirut to get to the ships, they got permission by the IDF to do so, yet they were all bombed before they got 100 metres. Outside one town for an hour the Israeli jets dropped bombs at Hezbollah Katusha positions, but when they didnt hit anything and weren't getting anywhere so they just bombed the town instead, cant remember the towns name but I'll get it and the articles in a bit.

No, but I condone Hezbollah as a national resistance to Zionist imperialism, just as the Poles or Czechs paid for German living space (an identical policy) over 50 years ago. The Jews started the conflict by occupying Arab land because they thought they 'earnt' it via the holocaust, and they continue to kill Palestinians on a daily basis, the only reason rockets fire into Israel is because the land is not theres, they are occupying it.

And Pyotr, look at the wiki articles, and I have many many more about Israeli racism. And please look at Beirut Pyotr, and tell me no war crimes were done. A convoy of civilians cars were leaving Beirut to get to the ships, they got permission by the IDF to do so, yet they were all bombed before they got 100 metres. Outside one town for an hour the Israeli jets dropped bombs at Hezbollah Katusha positions, but when they didnt hit anything and weren't getting anywhere so they just bombed the town instead, cant remember the towns name but I'll get it and the articles in a bit.

So the "Jews" control the UN now?

No, but I condone Hezbollah as a national resistance to Zionist imperialism, just as the Poles or Czechs paid for German living space (an identical policy) over 50 years ago. The Jews started the conflict by occupying Arab land because they thought they 'earnt' it via the holocaust, and they continue to kill Palestinians on a daily basis, the only reason rockets fire into Israel is because the land is not theres, they are occupying it.

And Pyotr, look at the wiki articles, and I have many many more about Israeli racism. And please look at Beirut Pyotr, and tell me no war crimes were done. A convoy of civilians cars were leaving Beirut to get to the ships, they got permission by the IDF to do so, yet they were all bombed before they got 100 metres. Outside one town for an hour the Israeli jets dropped bombs at Hezbollah Katusha positions, but when they didnt hit anything and weren't getting anywhere so they just bombed the town instead, cant remember the towns name but I'll get it and the articles in a bit.
So why did they blow up Jews in Buenos Aires, Argentina? Doesn't sound like resistance to me. Sounds like just plain terrorism.

Israel isn't going away no matter how many rockets are fired into it. Israel will also defend itself. If Hezbollah didn't go back and kidnap Israeli soldiers AFTER Israel left Lebanon the last war wouldn't have happened. If the Palestinians in Gaza didn't kidnap an Israeli soldier and shoot rockets at Israel AFTER the unilateral withdrawal Israel wouldn't be over there fighting.

Both sides have to realize that neither side is going anywhere. Israel should dismantle at least some of the West Bank settlements and the Palestinians should give up on the idea of destroying Israel. Of course that won't happen. The fighting will go on and keep on producing entertaining news stories. It's like the Yankees and Red Sox. You pick a team and root for it and the rivalry will never end.

So the "Jews" control the UN now?

Yes, it's all part of a zionist ploy to take over all of the world's pie bakeries and make us pay ridiculous prices for it. :p

So the "Jews" control the UN now?

no, but they did milk the holocuast thing to get their own state out of the UN.

So the "Jews" control the UN now?

The Protocols of Zion say so!!!!

no, but they did milk the holocuast thing to get their own state out of the UN.

Yeah, the Jews must be real glad that they were massacred. They got their own state out of it after all. :rolleyes:

So the "Jews" control the UN now?

I thought it was the anti-christ, who is the secretrary General....or does that only happen when the good people dissappear from Amerika?

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2006/s1697957.htm
Israel blows up UN outpost.

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2006/s1654375.htm
Israel slaughters journalists.

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2006/s1695574.htm
More war crimes.

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2006/s1691307.htm


How does an Israeli jet using laser-guided bombs manage to wipe out a UN post whose coordinates were very well-known to the Israeli military?

The UN and the French, in my opinion, are nothing more than terrorist supporters.

Until then I will declare you a terrorist and extremist sympathizer.

You seem to throw that out alot, and it's bullshit in every case you use it in. Seriously, take a step back. You can argue your points using logic and facts instead of name calling and accusations.

Right now you sound like some Inquisitor accusing everyone who argues with you of witchcraft for hereasy.

That was one bombing, and it is claimed that it was a technical problem. Show me evidence that proves otherwise.


The point was that there are many many such cases as this one. Woud you like me to compile a list of links?


That's about one racist Israeli politician, that does not generalize into every Israeli citizen, and funnily enough, that article contains several quotes from Jews expressing their opposition to his opinions.

Just a couple posts up the page is a link to a wikipidea article, and above that another poster posted a link about how Israel presents it's history in schools. Read before you post.


Both sides have to realize that neither side is going anywhere. Israel should dismantle at least some of the West Bank settlements and the Palestinians should give up on the idea of destroying Israel. Of course that won't happen. The fighting will go on and keep on producing entertaining news stories. It's like the Yankees and Red Sox. You pick a team and root for it and the rivalry will never end.

I was in full agreement untill we got to "keep producing entertaing news stories." Might I remind you that these are real people being killed and having their lives destroyed. I know you're not a bad person or anything, but I find your lack of concern chilling and a bit disturbing.




Also, you should all remember that the suicide bombings of Israel started in 1993. Israel has been opressing and bombing the crap out of Palestine since 1945.

<snip>




I was in full agreement untill we got to "keep producing entertaing news stories." Might I remind you that these are real people being killed and having their lives destroyed. I know you're not a bad person or anything, but I find your lack of concern chilling and a bit disturbing.




Also, you should all remember that the suicide bombings of Israel started in 1993. Israel has been opressing and bombing the crap out of Palestine since 1945.

Well, I'm kind of a scumbag. If they won't stop killing each other I'll watch the war on the news. They broadcast it for ratings and I'm not above watching it for entertainment. Like the song says, "I wanna watch things die from a good safe distance".

The attacks by Palestinians against Jews go back to the 1920s. The British even encouraged anti-Jewish riots in Palestine. This fight is older than you think.

Yeah, the Jews must be real glad that they were massacred. They got their own state out of it after all. :rolleyes:

Actually they love it. They use the holocuast as justification for whatever they want to do.

Exactly right Soviestan, they use it as diplomatic cover for 'national defence' for their war crimes, the Jews have no state, the land they have now they annexed.

You seem to throw that out alot, and it's bullshit in every case you use it in. Seriously, take a step back. You can argue your points using logic and facts instead of name calling and accusations.

Right now you sound like some Inquisitor accusing everyone who argues with you of witchcraft for hereasy.

Well, if you would have read the entire post that I was replying to you would understand that I said that out of heat through an anti-Israel post.

Also, take note that I haven't mentioned France or the UN in any posts, recently, in the past week or so. So I thought I was doing better.

Also note, I keep forgetting that most of NS is anti-Bush, anti-Israel, and covertly anti-America. If we support Bush, Israel, or America. We have no credibility.

Anyways, You are wrong about me saying something deragatory towards the UN and France in every post.

I do NOT like the UN nor do I like France. As some do NOT like Bush, some do NOT like Israel, some do NOT like the Terrorists, etc......

Actually they love it. They use the holocuast as justification for whatever they want to do.

Wow, the jews are really evil. Too bad Hitler didn't finish the job, eh?

You know, they can use their own right to exist as a state for what they do, or their own security, whatever. Or the Bible gives them the right to settle in the West Bank. And of course the Palestinians blowing things up gives them an excuse. They have more then then using their victim status to justify their actions. It is not just them shouting "holocaust!" all the time.

Well, if you would have read the entire post that I was replying to you would understand that I said that out of heat through an anti-Israel post.

Also, take note that I haven't mentioned France or the UN in any posts, recently, in the past week or so. So I thought I was doing better.

Also note, I keep forgetting that most of NS is anti-Bush, anti-Israel, and covertly anti-America. If we support Bush, Israel, or America. We have no credibility.

Anyways, You are wrong about me saying something deragatory towards the UN and France in every post.

I do NOT like the UN nor do I like France. As some do NOT like Bush, some do NOT like Israel, some do NOT like the Terrorists, etc......

Accully, my post wasn't in refrence to anything but the 2 posts I saw of yours in the pages directly precieding my post.

I wasn't attacking your not liking France or the UN, I was attacking the overuse of the "terrorist sympethiser" accusation.

I haven't been active for some time, so I don't know your history, I just saw 2 accuasions of being a terrorist sympethiser in 2 consecutive posts. But whatever, is no biggie, it just bugged me I guess.

Oh and Soviestan, next time you post your ideas about Judaism, don't use "The Turner Diaries" as your basis on knowledge about my relgion.

No, you're worse. You back people who are actually advocating genocide while I discussed genocide in a hypothetical context. You are far inferior to me and I'd be insulted if anyone compared a scumbag like you to me.

It is possible to oppose both Hezbolah and the IDF.

I'm curious to know who's going to hurt the IDF. I know you can't be talking about the French. :D

My money is on Israel. :D

If these IAF aircraft were perceived as threats, why didn't the French fire? Two reasons I can think of. One, bad ROE. Two, not ready. Sounds like a lot of false bravado on the part of the French Defense Minister.

But really, in today's climate, why would a peacekeeping first world nation (France) even assume that another first world nation (Israel) would threaten them militarily? It's really absurd on the face of it, and I have no idea what the IDF is thinking,

I'm curious to know who's going to hurt the IDF. I know you can't be talking about the French. :D

My money is on Israel. :D

Bodey, I'd just love it if you could give some solid reasons why the French couldn't effectively fight, much less smash, israel?

It can't be their equipment, they have a huge share of the arms market.

No will to fight? They've jumped into the balkans, all over africa, lebanon now, afghanistan, etc. More conflicts than the US or Israel can shake a stick at.

Or it this all because sixty five years ago, the French lost the battle of France? I think it is. In fact, I bet thats the exact same thing that the Ivory Coast was thinking, when they bombed those French troops.

"Un accident? C'est merde!"

Poof, no more Ivorian airforce.

Bodey, I'd just love it if you could give some solid reasons why the French couldn't effectively fight, much less smash, israel?

It can't be their equipment, they have a huge share of the arms market.

No will to fight? They've jumped into the balkans, all over africa, lebanon now, afghanistan, etc. More conflicts than the US or Israel can shake a stick at.

Or it this all because sixty five years ago, the French lost the battle of France? I think it is. In fact, I bet thats the exact same thing that the Ivory Coast was thinking, when they bombed those French troops.

"Un accident? C'est merde!"

Poof, no more Ivorian airforce.

The Ivorian Airforce is not the IAF. The IAF has a long battle history. In the 1980s over the Bekaa Valley, they scored 80 plus kills for 0 losses in ACM. The IAF is possibly the best air force in the world behind the USAF.

perhaps a non-sequitor, but i will submit that;

the sooner world powers recognize Isreal as the terrorist, rouge nation it is, and deal with it accordingly, the better off the world shall fair.

As we delay more and more, with the united states' politicians vetoing every UN action against their benefactors, the greater the ultimate cost in lives will be.

Israel wants nothing less than a US led war against the entire middle east, while at the same time Mossad and the Jew Lobby/Influence in the west makes sure that white nations are made to absorb millions and millions of non-white immigrates(among many,many other things), as it serves JEW to have THE GOY be divided and fighting amongst themselves. [Edit:]This again furthers the cause of making white nations impotent to self-determine and subdue the coming of ww3.

If you doubt the hugeness of treachery and influence, then tell me why the Israeli Apartheid (who are proven warmongers) are allowed to have tactical nuclear weapons in a highly unstable region?

The Ivorian Airforce is not the IAF. The IAF has a long battle history. In the 1980s over the Bekaa Valley, they scored 80 plus kills for 0 losses in ACM. The IAF is possibly the best air force in the world behind the USAF.

I never said the Ivorian airforce was the IAF. Re-read my post. I was talking about the will of the French. The Ivorians "accidentally blew up" a small number of french troops. Then the french walked over to the planes, now parked, and blew them up.

On the subject of best air force, I disagree. You said the Ivorian air force was not the Israeli one. Well, the Syrian air force is not the Armee De l'Air.

Israel has 90 or so varied F-15's, and 240 or so varied F-16's. Its a decent inventory, I'll agree with that. But it only has one or two AWACS, its Air to Air missiles aren't nearly as advanced as the Mica(Israel doesn't use AMRAAMs), and it has a smaller air force, in terms of personell, than France.

France operates 315 Mirage 2000's, as well as four recently upgraded AWACS platforms. The French have more personell, and a larger population, giving it a larger pool of replacements. But with all this, they are pretty evenly matched. Both nations have pilots with large amounts of training hours and real combat training. The French do perform more training exercises with other nations, but this isn't a huge advantage. The French also have 32 or so active Rafale's, 12 on the CdG, and 20 in an airforce squadren.

What really gives it to France is the ability to re-produce and re-supply. Unlike Israel, who relies on foreign designs, and many foreign parts for its airforce, the vast majority of the AdlA is built right in France. Israel has to rely on imports largely, to get resupplied. This would be a huge factor, when its navy isn't nearly as strong as France's, and all of its neighbors are unfriendly towards it.

A few weeks of air combat between the two nations would be hard to predict who the winner would be. A few months, or even up to a year, and the French would only do better and better.

perhaps a non-sequitor, but i will submit that;

the sooner world powers recognize Isreal as the terrorist, rouge nation it is, and deal with it accordingly, the better off the world shall fair.

As we delay more and more, with the united states' politicians vetoing every UN action against their benefactors, the greater the ultimate cost in lives will be.

Israel wants nothing less than a US led war against the entire middle east, while at the same time Mossad and the Jew Lobby/Influence in the west makes sure that white nations are made to absorb millions and millions of non-white immigrates, as it serves Israel to have THE GOY be divided and fighting amongst themselves. [Edit:]This again furthers the cause of making white nations impotent to self-determine and subdue the coming of ww3.

If you doubt the hugeness of treachery and influence, then tell me why the Israeli Apartheid (who are proven warmongers) are allowed to have tactical nuclear weapons in a highly unstable region?

Once again we see that fucking Nazis hide their racism in anti-semitism.

Go back to reading "The Turner Diaries" and get the hell off of this forum. Here is one you might like. This site lets you be an asshole and there are no reprucussions. (http://www.stormfront.com)

Once again we see that fucking Nazis hide their racism in anti-semitism.

Go back to reading "The Turner Diaries" and get the hell off of this forum. Here is one you might like. This site lets you be an asshole and there are no reprucussions. (http://www.stormfront.com)

Calling people nazi's and telling them to get the hell of the forum.

Glad to see you're letting your debate skills shine.

The Israeli F-15 and F-16 fighters are only F-15s and F-16s on the surface. Israeli companies strip the fighters down and put their own RADARs and other components on the fighters. Should components on the aircraft be damaged, Israel has the ability to repair them.

As for AWACs, France only has a few more than Israel. It should also be noted that Israeli aircraft will have more maneuvering fuel as French aircraft would be traveling longer distances. While SAMs aren't the most effective weapon, they would give the French a double threat and detract from their ability to perform air to air combat.

As for Israeli missiles, Israel has designed and built most of the missiles they use. I don't know how effective they are compared to the AMRAAM, but given how Israel prefers it to the AMRAAM, I bet it's pretty effective.

While France might have some experienced pilots, the IAF probably has more experienced personnel than any other Air Force. I will say they have much more combat experience than even the USAF. I don't think any single air force has more jet aces than the IAF has.

As for ground crews, the IAF's ground crews are efficiently organized. They actually drill for quick turnarounds meaning their aircraft can fly more sorties on any single day than their adversaries.

As for the Rafaels, they are good fighters, but the De Gaulle would be overwhelmed by the IAF. Losing your only carrier that took over a decade to build would be pretty disheartening and demoralizing.

Now don't get me wrong, the IAF would take many losses, but I just think their doctrine has been effective over the years in worse circumstances.

Calling people nazi's and telling them to get the hell of the forum.

Glad to see you're letting your debate skills shine.
check his user name and post. He is just a Nazi troll

Nazis aren't worth an ounce of energy.

Once again we see that fucking Nazis hide their racism in anti-semitism.

Go back to reading "The Turner Diaries" and get the hell off of this forum. Here is one you might like. This site lets you be an asshole and there are no reprucussions.

EH-HEM./.....firstly, I am not hiding my racialism. It should be clear in the title of my nation/my username. However, I do not feel that what I have typed here is worthy of the epitome of "racism".
If you want to hear some honest-to-goodness racism, you should read your own HOLY TALMUD,(gentile readers: research it, it is all you need to know about the jews).

It;s really hilarious how you scream "racism" and call me a nazi....
I see you......

for everyone, here is an interesting video.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8785876923462708738&q=zionist+war+crimes&hl=en

Oh and Soviestan, next time you post your ideas about Judaism, don't use "The Turner Diaries" as your basis on knowledge about my relgion.

this may shock you, but I have never read the turner diaries.

The Israeli F-15 and F-16 fighters are only F-15s and F-16s on the surface. Israeli companies strip the fighters down and put their own RADARs and other components on the fighters. Should components on the aircraft be damaged, Israel has the ability to repair them.

As for AWACs, France only has a few more than Israel. It should also be noted that Israeli aircraft will have more maneuvering fuel as French aircraft would be traveling longer distances. While SAMs aren't the most effective weapon, they would give the French a double threat and detract from their ability to perform air to air combat.

As for Israeli missiles, Israel has designed and built most of the missiles they use. I don't know how effective they are compared to the AMRAAM, but given how Israel prefers it to the AMRAAM, I bet it's pretty effective.

While France might have some experienced pilots, the IAF probably has more experienced personnel than any other Air Force. I will say they have much more combat experience than even the USAF. I don't think any single air force has more jet aces than the IAF has.

As for ground crews, the IAF's ground crews are efficiently organized. They actually drill for quick turnarounds meaning their aircraft can fly more sorties on any single day than their adversaries.

As for the Rafaels, they are good fighters, but the De Gaulle would be overwhelmed by the IAF. Losing your only carrier that took over a decade to build would be pretty disheartening and demoralizing.

Now don't get me wrong, the IAF would take many losses, but I just think their doctrine has been effective over the years in worse circumstances.

Just to preface, I think the Israeli airforce is quite good, but it gets more hype than it deserves, in my mind.

Israel replaces some of the components in the F-15I and F-16I. Some key systems, but a great deal is the same as it came "out of the box". Even with this, Israel is hardly a large industrial nation. It simply can't replace losses as fast as France, even if it can do a decent job maintaining the ones that don't go down.

Yes, Israeli jets would in general have more loiter time than the French ones, though refueling aircraft would boost that. However, in the era of BVR combat, the Mirage's would likely kite the israeli aircraft(Fly to them, or where they best guess they are, fire off missiles, head back). Also, the French have 7 AWACS infact, four E-3's and three naval E-2C's. AWACS are a large force multiplier, and the loss of even one could hurt israel badly, while France could withstand a couple losses of them.

Yes, Israeli would have SAM's, but you can't factor out the French navy. Seeing as most of this air combat would likely take place near the israeli coast, it would be Land SAMs firing at the French, and naval ones firing at the Israeli's. I will say there is a good parity in SAM's, as Israel has a pretty good air defense network.

Israel's reason not to use AMRAAM's is more political than technical

http://www.jinsa.org/articles/articles.html/function/view/categoryid/105/documentid/272/history/3,2359,947,653,105,272

The Derby series is alright, but it simply doesn't operate on the same level of BVR combat as the AMRAAM, Mica, or soon to be Meteor. To be fair, the Israeli's don't need to many BVR missiles; Downing Mig-25's with relatively short range missiles isn't much of a problem for them, and much cheaper.

I don't quite agree with your assertion of combat training and the IAF. Quality, and recent timing, are quite important here. Israel has lots of experience, but the last time it fought an actual airforce was in 1982. 24 years later, most of those pilots who were involved are gone. The recent lebanese experience was combat experience, but the israeli's weren't really being fought back against, at least in the air. Certainly not against other aircraft.

On the other hand, France has regular air combat excercises with other nations, covering a broad spectrum of training styles and equipment. It had active forces in the Gulf war and Balkans conflict, so more French pilots are likely still around that have that experience. I've tried to find figures for average training hours in the air, but its hard.

I'm sure that the israeli ground crews are good, but I don't see anything in particular that makes them better than other air powers. I'm interested in learning more about what the israeli's do differently, however.

The CdG indeed wouldn't be able to last long alone. However, with large amounts of destroyer and cruisers providing SAM cover, French aircraft from home contributing, and AWACS giving the French a good heads up, it would probably not get sunken, though its contribution wouldn't be conflict-changing. However, only 12 Rafale's are on the CdG; 20 are based in France, recently becoming active.

The problem here is, I think Israeli doctrine is too focused on the conflicts it expects, with its neighbors. Its very unlikely Israel will have to deal with an enemy with an advanced air force like those in europe or the US. Israel's doctrine seems to be having the quality to down low-tech planes easily and quickly, and there it excels. However, when facing an opponent that built its aircraft with the idea of fighting similarly high tech aircraft, the israeli's will be in a pinch, because it doesn't have the ability to sustain a prolonged attrition against its airforce.

Just to preface, I think the Israeli airforce is quite good, but it gets more hype than it deserves, in my mind.

Israel replaces some of the components in the F-15I and F-16I. Some key systems, but a great deal is the same as it came "out of the box". Even with this, Israel is hardly a large industrial nation. It simply can't replace losses as fast as France, even if it can do a decent job maintaining the ones that don't go down.

Yes, Israeli jets would in general have more loiter time than the French ones, though refueling aircraft would boost that. However, in the era of BVR combat, the Mirage's would likely kite the israeli aircraft(Fly to them, or where they best guess they are, fire off missiles, head back). Also, the French have 7 AWACS infact, four E-3's and three naval E-2C's. AWACS are a large force multiplier, and the loss of even one could hurt israel badly, while France could withstand a couple losses of them.

Yes, Israeli would have SAM's, but you can't factor out the French navy. Seeing as most of this air combat would likely take place near the israeli coast, it would be Land SAMs firing at the French, and naval ones firing at the Israeli's. I will say there is a good parity in SAM's, as Israel has a pretty good air defense network.

Israel's reason not to use AMRAAM's is more political than technical

http://www.jinsa.org/articles/articles.html/function/view/categoryid/105/documentid/272/history/3,2359,947,653,105,272

The Derby series is alright, but it simply doesn't operate on the same level of BVR combat as the AMRAAM, Mica, or soon to be Meteor. To be fair, the Israeli's don't need to many BVR missiles; Downing Mig-25's with relatively short range missiles isn't much of a problem for them, and much cheaper.

I don't quite agree with your assertion of combat training and the IAF. Quality, and recent timing, are quite important here. Israel has lots of experience, but the last time it fought an actual airforce was in 1982. 24 years later, most of those pilots who were involved are gone. The recent lebanese experience was combat experience, but the israeli's weren't really being fought back against, at least in the air. Certainly not against other aircraft.

On the other hand, France has regular air combat excercises with other nations, covering a broad spectrum of training styles and equipment. It had active forces in the Gulf war and Balkans conflict, so more French pilots are likely still around that have that experience. I've tried to find figures for average training hours in the air, but its hard.

I'm sure that the israeli ground crews are good, but I don't see anything in particular that makes them better than other air powers. I'm interested in learning more about what the israeli's do differently, however.

The CdG indeed wouldn't be able to last long alone. However, with large amounts of destroyer and cruisers providing SAM cover, French aircraft from home contributing, and AWACS giving the French a good heads up, it would probably not get sunken, though its contribution wouldn't be conflict-changing. However, only 12 Rafale's are on the CdG; 20 are based in France, recently becoming active.

The problem here is, I think Israeli doctrine is too focused on the conflicts it expects, with its neighbors. Its very unlikely Israel will have to deal with an enemy with an advanced air force like those in europe or the US. Israel's doctrine seems to be having the quality to down low-tech planes easily and quickly, and there it excels. However, when facing an opponent that built its aircraft with the idea of fighting similarly high tech aircraft, the israeli's will be in a pinch, because it doesn't have the ability to sustain a prolonged attrition against its airforce.
The Israeli military would be absolutely nothing without American support, which insha'Allah will end.

The Israeli military would be absolutely nothing without American support, which insha'Allah will end.

You really make me laugh.

The Israeli military did quite well kicking enemy ass in the 1948, 1956, and 1967 wars. All three of those came before the US started giving military aid to Israel when Nixon entered office in 1969.

Quit making excuses for why your fellow Muslims couldn't beat 10,000 poorly armed Palmach soldiers in 1947-48.