NationStates Jolt Archive

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061119/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_palestinians

Earlier Sunday,
Israel called off airstrikes on the homes of two militants after hundreds of Palestinians crowded around the buildings forming human shields, a new tactic that forced the Israelis to re-evaluate their aerial campaign in the
Gaza Strip.

The Palestinians began to gather around the homes shortly after the Israeli army ordered occupants out of them. Israel routinely issues such warnings before attacking buildings that it says are used to store weapons, saying it wants to avoid casualties.

Instead of leaving the buildings, the homeowners remained inside and were quickly joined by crowds of supporters who gathered on balconies, rooftops and in the streets outside.

Personally I say this makes them targets if they willingly use their bodies to defend terrorists.

Either way, the anti-Israel Nazis on this site have no standing when claiming the "evil Jooz" are trying to commit genocide.

They learned after Beit Hanuun that enough was enough for civilian casualties and that the international community is bloody fed up with them. That's all there is to it.

If they had attacked it, the French and German peacekeepers in Lebanon would have shown no restraint in blowing up the IDF's precious planes.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061119/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_palestinians



Personally I say this makes them targets if they willingly use their bodies to defend terrorists.

Either way, the anti-Israel Nazis on this site have no standing when claiming the "evil Jooz" are trying to commit genocide.

Pure speculation on my part: If Israel had solid proof that they were using the houses to store weapons and were militants. I think Israel should have fired on the houses. As for the human sheilds, I'm with President Bush when he said that if you're protecting and supporting the terrorists you are against us. If the civilians knowingly were protecting them and chose to be human shields, then too bad. Israel should have taken the shots.

They learned after Beit Hanuun that enough was enough for civilian casualties and that the international community is bloody fed up with them. That's all there is to it.

If they had attacked it, the French and German peacekeepers in Lebanon would have shown no restraint in blowing up the IDF's precious planes.

Yootopia. I have to laugh at almost all of your posts on the topic of Israel. Gaza and Lebanon are really seperate conflicts. If Israel bombs terrorists in Gaza, it has no reprocussions with the French and Germans in Lebanon.

Let me also ask you this, do you honestly believe Germans would fire on Israelis?

I guess I could expect such a logically flawed post from someone who believes the US government destroyed the WTC.

Pure speculation on my part: If Israel had solid proof that they were using the houses to store weapons and were militants. I think Israel should have fired on the houses. As for the human sheilds, I'm with President Bush when he said that if you're protecting and supporting the terrorists you are against us. If the civilians knowingly were protecting them and chose to be human shields, then too bad. Israel should have taken the shots.

I agree

They learned after Beit Hanuun that enough was enough for civilian casualties and that the international community is bloody fed up with them. That's all there is to it.

If they had attacked it, the French and German peacekeepers in Lebanon would have shown no restraint in blowing up the IDF's precious planes.

If the French and Germany decide to fire upon Israel's Defence Force, it would clearly be an act of war. I'd put my money on Israel. Yes, the USA would ultimately back up Israel.

Pure speculation on my part: If Israel had solid proof that they were using the houses to store weapons and were militants. I think Israel should have fired on the houses. As for the human sheilds, I'm with President Bush when he said that if you're protecting and supporting the terrorists you are against us. If the civilians knowingly were protecting them and chose to be human shields, then too bad. Israel should have taken the shots.
You disgust me.

They're people, you bastard. Living, real people, with names just like you or I.

If a foreign power attacked your state and said they were going to bomb a resistance member's house near yours, would you honestly think that staying at home and letting it happen was the right thing to do?

Or would you view those that helped as 'military assets'?

Pure speculation on my part: If Israel had solid proof that they were using the houses to store weapons and were militants. I think Israel should have fired on the houses. As for the human sheilds, I'm with President Bush when he said that if you're protecting and supporting the terrorists you are against us. If the civilians knowingly were protecting them and chose to be human shields, then too bad. Israel should have taken the shots.

No,killing civilians is never justified.I do see where your coming from,and I'm almost inclined to agree,but the libertarian in me says that killing civilians is inexcusable on any level,and I'm glad the Israelis showed restraint this time.

Pure speculation on my part: If Israel had solid proof that they were using the houses to store weapons and were militants. I think Israel should have fired on the houses. As for the human sheilds, I'm with President Bush when he said that if you're protecting and supporting the terrorists you are against us. If the civilians knowingly were protecting them and chose to be human shields, then too bad. Israel should have taken the shots.
Yeah right dude. Israel targets houses who have any family member suspected of terrorist links, even if they live a hundred miles away. These people are protecting their houses and their right to live.

And IDF: I don't know where you figured out Palestinians 1337-speak, but one example of refraining from mass murder is hardly proof of anything except one example of refraining to commit mass murder. Even members of your beloved Nazi party dissented.

If the French and Germany decide to fire upon Israel's Defence Force, it would clearly be an act of war.
Absolutely. But it would be their job, seeing as they're supposed to protect Lebanon.
I'd put my money on Israel. Yes, the USA would ultimately back up Israel.
Israel would get buggered over by the French army, and the Germans would play an important role in logistics and at sea (I don't think they'd land in Israel due to concerns over looking like the Fourth Reich).

The US army is massively overstretched, and it knows that if it goes against Europe for the sake of Israel in a military manner, it's going to lose all of its allies and provoke Russia and China - something it can't really do.

Pure speculation on my part: If Israel had solid proof that they were using the houses to store weapons and were militants. I think Israel should have fired on the houses. As for the human sheilds, I'm with President Bush when he said that if you're protecting and supporting the terrorists you are against us. If the civilians knowingly were protecting them and chose to be human shields, then too bad. Israel should have taken the shots.

Hey!
Choosing to be a human shield is a respectable line of work. There's good money in it, too.


:rolleyes:

You disgust me.

They're people, you bastard. Living, real people, with names just like you or I.

If a foreign power attacked your state and said they were going to bomb a resistance member's house near yours, would you honestly think that staying at home and letting it happen was the right thing to do?

Or would you view those that helped as 'military assets'?

I know what you're saying,it's disgusting.But let's face it,they're defending terrorists,they know EXACTLY what they're doing.They're putting themselves in the way of those missiles.But I do agree with you,Israel should not have fired,and I am incredibly glad they didn't.

It has nothing to do with the Bloody Terrorist Fascist Israelis showing restraint. It is showing the non-violent of the Palestinian people who are tired of having their people being killed and having their houses destroyed.

It is the Israeli government that for 60 years committed War Crimes and Violence against the Palestinian people that have led to these incidents of supporting so called militants, where is the proof.

Good for the Palestinians.

If the French and Germany decide to fire upon Israel's Defence Force, it would clearly be an act of war. I'd put my money on Israel. Yes, the USA would ultimately back up Israel.
No it wouldn't, not against France and Germany, not with Democratic control of both Houses. That's the most ridiculous thing you could think of saying, since this would effectively start a third world war. In this case, it would be in particular trouble because China would likely side against it, and Canada, for all its powerlessness would also not side with it. Even the US understands overwhelming odds.

You disgust me.

They're people, you bastard. Living, real people, with names just like you or I.

If a foreign power attacked your state and said they were going to bomb a resistance member's house near yours, would you honestly think that staying at home and letting it happen was the right thing to do?

Or would you view those that helped as 'military assets'?

I have absolutely no sympathy for the supporters of terrorism whether it be the regimes or civilians. Terrorism is REAL. It isn't something that Israel and USA made up. People are starting to say that the US's happenings in Iraq has worsened "terrorism". I wholeheartedly disagree. I think with the US going into Iraq has stirred the nest and now instead of the terrorists hiding and waiting to hit somebody in the back, they have been forced to come out in the open. Reality: It is a lot easier to hit a target you can see than one you cannot. We have the terrorists scared and have forced them out of their caves.

Reminder to those who think that the US has took a side road to the war on terrorism meaning the Iraq war. The USA is still in hot pursuit of the terrorist organizations and is continueing to find them and either destroy them or arrest them.

Again, I have absolutely no sympathy for the terrorist sympathizers whether it is the regimes or civilians who support them and protect them. They are as guilty as the terrorists themselves.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061119/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_palestinians



Personally I say this makes them targets if they willingly use their bodies to defend terrorists.


Which is why I'd expect a "they deserved it" style post from had they fired. They are to be commended for showing restraint for once, however.

Since 5,000 + Palestinian have been killed by the bastard Israeli IDF which has commited so many f*ing war crimes, I would hope that Germany and France or someone like that had the balls to wipe out their freaking airforce.

Since 5,000 + Palestinian have been killed by the bastard Israeli IDF which has commited so many f*ing war crimes, I would hope that Germany and France or someone like that had the balls to wipe out their freaking airforce.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061119/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_palestinians

Personally I say this makes them targets if they willingly use their bodies to defend terrorists.

Either way, the anti-Israel Nazis on this site have no standing when claiming the "evil Jooz" are trying to commit genocide.

Good call by the IDF. :)

And note, they weren't - in this case - "defending terrorists". The IDF called the residents of the building and let them know they were about to be bombed, so there were no human targets here.

However, I still question the approach of bombing civilian houses where the IDF suspect might be used to store weapons...
If the French and Germany decide to fire upon Israel's Defence Force, it would clearly be an act of war. I'd put my money on Israel. Yes, the USA would ultimately back up Israel.

No, it wouldn't be an act of war - I believe it was referred to the Israeli provocations recently, and if so it could very well be seen as an act of self defence and within their mandate.

And seeing as neither Israel nor France or Germany wishes a war, it would be downplayed as an "undortunate incident" should anything happen. Nobody would call it war.

Oh, and you assume too much if you take it for granted that the US would land on Israels side in such a conflict. I believe the US would stay out and actually try to mediate impartially.

I'm with President Bush when he said that if you're protecting and supporting the terrorists you are against us. If the civilians knowingly were protecting them and chose to be human shields, then too bad.
You're a traitor to Hollywood. It is the finest tradition of the American movie market and psyche to have the hero step between the bad guy and the weak supporting character. America had a revolution over their right to property, so instead of spouting this King George bullshit, read your damn script.
Further consider: the whole of the civil rights movement in the US was based on the concept of banding together in exactly this same way.

Again, I have absolutely no sympathy for the terrorist sympathizers whether it is the regimes or civilians who support them and protect them. They are as guilty as the terrorists themselves.

So I take it that you don't like the american government much?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061119/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_palestinians

Personally I say this makes them targets if they willingly use their bodies to defend terrorists.

Either way, the anti-Israel Nazis on this site have no standing when claiming the "evil Jooz" are trying to commit genocide.
Ok, so, they've shown restraint for once. But, that's just once....

I'd like to see them try and repeat this remarkable act of not thinking with their asses.

So I take it that you don't like the american government much?
No, I think not. He probably imagines it gets in the way of King George.

If they had attacked it, the French and German peacekeepers in Lebanon would have shown no restraint in blowing up the IDF's precious planes.
Let's face it, they wouldn't.

If the French and Germany decide to fire upon Israel's Defence Force, it would clearly be an act of war.
I would depend on what the IDF are doing. If they were overstepping agreed bounds, then firing on them wouldn't be an act of war. However, I haven't read the legalese on this topic, and I doubt you have either.

If the French and Germany decide to fire upon Israel's Defence Force, it would clearly be an act of war. I'd put my money on Israel. Yes, the USA would ultimately back up Israel.

I can't see the US backing up Israel against Germany. It's economic suicide, for both sides.

I can't see the US backing up Israel against Germany. It's economic suicide, for both sides.
Or France, or any other 'western' nation that either depends on for economic viability. There might be a lot of huffing and puffing, and chest thumping but no real aggression.

Let me also ask you this, do you honestly believe Germans would fire on Israelis?

So you make the racist assumption that all Germans are now, and always were, Nazis. Nice.

Go take your hatred somewhere else.

Let's face it, they wouldn't.
I dunno. I think there's only so far France and Germany are up for getting pushed, to be honest.

So you make the racist assumption that all Germans are now, and always were, Nazis. Nice.

Go take your hatred somewhere else.
He seems to also be forgetting that France was also involved in a similar incident. No one except the person who originally mentioned it seems to remember that France came close as well.

Pure speculation on my part: If Israel had solid proof that they were using the houses to store weapons and were militants. I think Israel should have fired on the houses.
That's why pro-zionazi are so unpopular.

Note: not zionists; these are different. Zionazi are ones that support the notion that non-Jews are a lesser race which life is worth as much as of an animal.


As for the human sheilds, I'm with President Bush when he said that if you're protecting and supporting the terrorists you are against us. If the civilians knowingly were protecting them and chose to be human shields, then too bad. Israel should have taken the shots.
The thought that these civilians, maybe, were really knowingly protecting people whom they knew to be innocent probably didn't cross your mind?
Why are you so eager to condemn people you've barely heard of and know nothing about?

The thought that these civilians, maybe were really knowingly protecting people whom they knew to be innocent probably didn't cross your mind?
Why are you so eager to condemn people you've barely heard of and know nothing about?
It's easier to accuse, and look at the black and white of it, than to consider the facts and muddle through the shades of grey.

It's easier to accuse, and look at the black and white of it, than to consider the facts and muddle through the shades of grey.
None of us have, or ever will get, the full information on this thing. Ever.

So you make the racist assumption that all Germans are now, and always were, Nazis. Nice.

Go take your hatred somewhere else.

He's a reverse Nazi; he hates Germans.

He's a reverse Nazi; he hates Germans.
He also calls those who disagree with Israel 'Nazis', which is the post pathetic and irritating assumption ever.

Yes, that's right, IDF, some of us normal people don't agree with Israel's actions...

Oh no, wait... I mean "urmm the Holocaust was a total lie... yes..."

Good for the Palestinians. I approve. It's about time they took a proper move in their quest for freedom. I still have no sympathy for them. They spent far too long bombing Israeli bars, busses and shopping malls for me to forget so easily. But I think this is a small step in the right direction. If they would restrict their efforts to attacking Israeli troops and settlements in Gaza and the West Bank, I think they'd get a lot more support. I know I'd warm to their cause.

But as for right now, I say fuck em all(combatants and their supporters, not opposed or uninvolved civilians).

He's a reverse Nazi; he hates Germans.

I'm rathe rproud of my German ancestry, and it pisses me off to no end when people automatically equate ANY German, from ANY period, with a Nazi.

And the rampant insinuation by any defender of Israel that Germans who attacks Israel are Nazis is sickening. I did not throw you in camps, you were not thrown into camps, so stop fucking whining about emotional distress from history you never experienced. It doesnt give you the right to hate when you yourself were never hated.

Next person to try this bullshit, and I'm off the deep end.

I'm rathe rproud of my German ancestry, and it pisses me off to no end when people automatically equate ANY German, from ANY period, with a Nazi.

And the rampant insinuation by any defender of Israel that Germans who attacks Israel are Nazis is sickening. I did not throw you in camps, you were not thrown into camps, so stop fucking whining about emotional distress from history you never experienced. It doesnt give you the right to hate when you yourself were never hated.

Next person to try this bullshit, and I'm off the deep end.

You're a Nazi. Admit it.

Good for the Palestinians. I approve. It's about time they took a proper move in their quest for freedom. I still have no sympathy for them. They spent far too long bombing Israeli bars, busses and shopping malls for me to forget so easily. But I think this is a small step in the right direction. If they would restrict their efforts to attacking Israeli troops and settlements in Gaza and the West Bank, I think they'd get a lot more support. I know I'd warm to their cause.

But as for right now, I say fuck em all(combatants and their supporters, not opposed or uninvolved civilians).
Yeah, because the Allies restricted themselves to targeting military structures in the WWII. And the Americans set such a good example. The truth of the matter is that the Palestinians can't fight against the IDF, so they fight against the group that supports the IDF: Israelis. Targeting civilians that 'are harboring terrorists' is no different than targeting civilians that harbor a terrorist government. It doesn't matter if Israel is actually a terrorist government or not. The only truth that exists is the one right in front of our faces, and the truth in front of Palestinians' faces is that Israel is an occupying force and regularly blows up houses and people.

You're a Nazi. Admit it.

Call me a Nazi all you want, but it does nothing for your cause.

Double whammy too. Flaming troll everybody!

And the rampant insinuation by any defender of Israel that Germans who attacks Israel are Nazis is sickening. I did not throw you in camps, you were not thrown into camps, so stop fucking whining about emotional distress from history you never experienced. It doesnt give you the right to hate when you yourself were never hated.
I learned two things in Hebrew school: how to read the language, and that Jews have been whining about their lot for 5000 years. It ain't stopping now, especially when we've got a whole country to whine together.

EDIT: I got the impression New Ireland was being ironic...

Call me a Nazi all you want, but it does nothing for your cause.

Double whammy too. Flaming troll everybody!

Someone doesn't have a sense of humour! La la la la la-la! :D

Can you really blame the Palestinians? Practicely brought up to hate the Israelis. No one having your back accept a bunch of corrupt politicians, some gun-crazed terrorists and all those baby-eating lefties.

Hell, what would you do?

Trilby63;11968692']Can you really blame the Palestinians? Practicely brought up to hate the Israelis. No one having your back accept a bunch of corrupt politicians, some gun-crazed terrorists and all those baby-eating lefties.

Hell, what would you do?
Ah yes, beautiful, beautiful ignorance.

Yeah, because the Allies restricted themselves to targeting military structures in the WWII. And the Americans set such a good example. The truth of the matter is that the Palestinians can't fight against the IDF, so they fight against the group that supports the IDF: Israelis. Targeting civilians that 'are harboring terrorists' is no different than targeting civilians that harbor a terrorist government. It doesn't matter if Israel is actually a terrorist government or not. The only truth that exists is the one right in front of our faces, and the truth in front of Palestinians' faces is that Israel is an occupying force and regularly blows up houses and people.

Which I understand, and as long as palestinians target the occupiers of their lands, I can relate. But targeting Israeli civilians that support their government's sovereignty is just as wrong as targeting palestinians that fight for theirs.

Someone doesn't have a sense of humour! La la la la la-la! :D

Hey, wrong time to poke me.

Plus it was immeasurably fun to yell "TROLLLLL!!!!" at someone. :)

The only truth that exists is the one right in front of our faces, and the truth in front of Palestinians' faces is that Israel is an occupying force and regularly blows up houses and people.

BTW, I don't even understand why some people support house bombings. It's one thing to kill in a war where it's kill or to be killed. It's completely another to tell everyone "Please get away, now we will bomb this house" and do it. IDF seems to be intentionally ignoring possibilities of working inside legal and moral norms common to other forces.

Ah yes, beautiful, beautiful ignorance.

And you know better?

Someone doesn't have a sense of humour! La la la la la-la! :D
I've seen Germans accused of many things: a sense of humour isn't usually one of them. :rolleyes: Which is kindof counterintuitive in the world's tourists.

I've seen Germans accused of many things: a sense of humour isn't usually one of them. :rolleyes: Which is kindof counterintuitive in the world's tourists.

It's true: How many great german comedians can you name? :p

BTW, I don't even understand why some people support house bombings. It's one thing to kill in a war where it's kill or to be killed. It's completely another to tell everyone "Please get away, now we will bomb this house" and do it. IDF seems to be intentionally ignoring possibilities of working inside legal and moral norms common to other forces.
well it's lose-lose right? for all my spouting of 'the truth of the matter is...' how do you fight terrorists? i'm pretty sure that the only way is to bring them health, education, and the works, but that takes at least 20-30 or more years for a generation to go through. and the gains aren't immediate, while the death toll mounts. i'm also pretty sure that all current strategies just make more terrorists. but it's like global warming. the only real resolution of the recent UN conference was to resolve that no one is interested in doing anything that does not have an immediate monetary value.

Trilby63;11968713']And you know better?

I think it was the "baby-eating lefties" comment that got his,and my,back up.

I think it was the "baby-eating lefties" comment that got his,and my,back up.

<---- is actually a lefty.

It's true: How many great german comedians can you name? :p
Well, i did some hard research (http://www2.dw-world.de/southasia/germany/1.197290.1.html). Apparently, there have been some.
EDIT: not terribly impressed. I'm glad that both Marx and Wagner worked their ways in though.

The IDF should have fired.

In any "Human Shield" situation, the only rational act is to ignore the human shields and fire anyway. This eliminates the Human Shield as a valid tactic, and will save lives in the long run.

The IDF should have fired.

In any "Human Shield" situation, the only rational act is to ignore the human shields and fire anyway. This eliminates the Human Shield as a valid tactic, and will save lives in the long run.
I don't see, really, how it will save lives at all...

The IDF should have fired.

In any "Human Shield" situation, the only rational act is to ignore the human shields and fire anyway. This eliminates the Human Shield as a valid tactic, and will save lives in the long run.

...No.
That is rubbish.
Firing on civilians usually provokes outrage.Especially if the Israelis do it-so many people are dying for an excuse to annihlate Israel,it would cause a lot more killings.This course of action has already caused no deaths,so in that sense,you are wrong.It's a step in the right direction.Killing civilians,innocent civilians,with names,families,lovers,is not a step in the direction.
You are a fool.

Well, i did some hard research (http://www2.dw-world.de/southasia/germany/1.197290.1.html). Apparently, there have been some.
EDIT: not terribly impressed. I'm glad that both Marx and Wagner worked their ways in though.

So when does the humor begin? :p

The IDF should have fired.

In any "Human Shield" situation, the only rational act is to ignore the human shields and fire anyway. This eliminates the Human Shield as a valid tactic, and will save lives in the long run.
there was recently a study I was reading about, correlating the number of incidents of war, with the number of US congressmen having military experience. the result was negative: congressmen that had been to war understood why it should be avoided. methinks you have not served in the military. before someone asks, neither have I, but I am willing to bet most pro-war people have never been in a warzone.

...No.
That is rubbish.
Firing on civilians usually provokes outrage.Especially if the Israelis do it-so many people are dying for an excuse to annihlate Israel,it would cause a lot more killings.This course of action has already caused no deaths,so in that sense,you are wrong.It's a step in the right direction.Killing civilians,innocent civilians,with names,families,lovers,is not a step in the direction.
You are a fool.

No, I'm actually THINKING instead of REACTING. If human shield tactics are successful, they'll spread. While protecting a building is fairly inoccuous, the obvious next step is to use crowds and civilians ahead of attackers, or to protect HQ's and command centres - or even artillery emplacements.

Then Israel is going to have to decide whether to allow Palestinian forces to do as they like, or kill large numbers of civilians.

Stopping something like this before it gets started is always less bloody then trying to deal with it later.

there was recently a study I was reading about, correlating the number of incidents of war, with the number of US congressmen having military experience. the result was negative: congressmen that had been to war understood why it should be avoided. methinks you have not served in the military. before someone asks, neither have I, but I am willing to bet most pro-war people have never been in a warzone.

Four years, USMC. Though, accepted, never in a war zone.

No, I'm actually THINKING instead of REACTING. If human shield tactics are successful, they'll spread. While protecting a building is fairly inoccuous, the obvious next step is to use crowds and civilians ahead of attackers, or to protect HQ's and command centres - or even artillery emplacements.

Then Israel is going to have to decide whether to allow Palestinian forces to do as they like, or kill large numbers of civilians.

Stopping something like this before it gets started is always less bloody then trying to deal with it later.
it is always easier to assume that everyone in the warzone is guilty of something and let God sort them out later, no? you assume that these people were protecting terrorists, but you have no proof of this. it could just be that the single tent provided by the UN for the families of 12 that are displaced are simply not good enough. and they're tired of it. there is no reason at all to believe that most Palestinians would not gladly live their lives in peace without worrying a bomb will drop on their children.

No, I'm actually THINKING instead of REACTING. If human shield tactics are successful, they'll spread. While protecting a building is fairly inoccuous, the obvious next step is to use crowds and civilians ahead of attackers, or to protect HQ's and command centres - or even artillery emplacements.

Then Israel is going to have to decide whether to allow Palestinian forces to do as they like, or kill large numbers of civilians.

Stopping something like this before it gets started is always less bloody then trying to deal with it later.

Or they could have shot at innocent civilians.
That provokes international outrage.And the Palestinians will do it again.Because they know it is gaining support for them,on some level,and demonising the Israelis.As I said,this course of action has so far caused no deaths.No deaths at all.So I don't see how this causes more killings in the long run.Just my opinion.

Four years, USMC. Though, accepted, never in a war zone.
i stand partially corrected. and to elaborate on my previous point, it is even scarier living in such places as a civilian: which I have done, insofar as parts of Brasil can turn into warzones.

No, I'm actually THINKING instead of REACTING. If human shield tactics are successful, they'll spread. While protecting a building is fairly inoccuous, the obvious next step is to use crowds and civilians ahead of attackers, or to protect HQ's and command centres - or even artillery emplacements.

Then Israel is going to have to decide whether to allow Palestinian forces to do as they like, or kill large numbers of civilians.

Stopping something like this before it gets started is always less bloody then trying to deal with it later.

That's fair enough in the short term but but in the long term it just gives the terrorists another excuse to yell "Remember Koom Valley!"

it is always easier to assume that everyone in the warzone is guilty of something and let God sort them out later, no? you assume that these people were protecting terrorists, but you have no proof of this. it could just be that the single tent provided by the UN for the families of 12 that are displaced are simply not good enough. and they're tired of it. there is no reason at all to believe that most Palestinians would not gladly live their lives in peace without worrying a bomb will drop on their children.

Actually, you're the only one making any assumptions here. I don't have a clue whether those buildings were actually the homes of terrorists or not; neither do you.
But those people were there to stop them being destroyed. I don't know their motivations; to be perfectly honest, I don't care, either. But they were standing around those buildings to stop them being destroyed, or in other words, acting as voluntary human shields.
And because it worked this time, they'll probably try it again next time. And the time after that. Until somebody doesn't back down. And then many, many people are going to die. Which I do not want.

Better to stop it now.

Actually, you're the only one making any assumptions here. I don't have a clue whether those buildings were actually the homes of terrorists or not; neither do you.
But those people were there to stop them being destroyed. I don't know their motivations; to be perfectly honest, I don't care, either. But they were standing around those buildings to stop them being destroyed, or in other words, acting as voluntary human shields.
And because it worked this time, they'll probably try it again next time. And the time after that. Until somebody doesn't back down. And then many, many people are going to die. Which I do not want.

Better to stop it now.

Because heaven forbid people protect theirs and their neighbors' homes from destruction. :p

Because heaven forbid people protect theirs and their neighbors' homes from destruction. :p

Within limits it's a good thing. When the military says "we're going to annihilate this building with a great big air delivered bomb", the rational raction is to get out of the way.

They learned after Beit Hanuun that enough was enough for civilian casualties and that the international community is bloody fed up with them. That's all there is to it.

If they had attacked it, the French and German peacekeepers in Lebanon would have shown no restraint in blowing up the IDF's precious planes.

there is realistically nothing that France or Germany can do about it. Israel would simply be able to retaliate by capturing or killing them and then possibly attacking the French/German homelands since France and Germany would be violating Israeli soverinty hence committing an act of against Israel. The Europeans would lose to Israel.

Within limits it's a good thing. When the military says "we're going to annihilate this building with a great big air delivered bomb", the rational raction is to get out of the way.

Unless of course all your worldly possessions are in that house,and you could not live without them,and your life would be meaningless without them.Unless of course your family are in there,or your partner,child,anyone you love.I'd bloody get in the way.

Within limits it's a good thing. When the military says "we're going to annihilate this building with a great big air delivered bomb", the rational raction is to get out of the way.

Even if it's somebody else's military?

there is realistically nothing that France or Germany can do about it. Israel would simply be able to retaliate by capturing or killing them and then possibly attacking the French/German homelands since France and Germany would be violating Israeli soverinty hence committing an act of against Israel. The Europeans would lose to Israel.

No they really wouldn't. The combined military of France and Germany would beat Israel.

there is realistically nothing that France or Germany can do about it. Israel would simply be able to retaliate by capturing or killing them and then possibly attacking the French/German homelands since France and Germany would be violating Israeli soverinty hence committing an act of against Israel. The Europeans would lose to Israel.

...What the hell are you talking about?
That's just stupid."Omg,France and Germany attacked us,let's bomb those countries and provoke the rest of Europe into a conflict!
Not only that,let's lose the USA's backing!Hell yeah!"

NOOOOOOOO.That is stupid.

Unless of course all your worldly possessions are in that house,and you could not live without them,and your life would be meaningless without them.Unless of course your family are in there,or your partner,child,anyone you love.I'd bloody get in the way.

Except that none of those things can possibly apply in this case. Israel clearly must have announced the attack beforehand, for all of these people to have been able to congregate there; therefore, there must have been enough time to get all the people and quite a bit of stuff OUT of them.

Except that none of those things can possibly apply in this case. Israel clearly must have announced the attack beforehand, for all of these people to have been able to congregate there; therefore, there must have been enough time to get all the people and quite a bit of stuff OUT of them.

I'd still rather not be left without a home.

Even if it's somebody else's military?

ESPECIALLY if it's somebody else's military! They're more likely to actually do it!

I'd still rather not be left without a home.

Same here. But I'd rather be alive and homeless than dead. One of those situations is rectifiable.

except that France and Germany would not be so dumb as to attack Israel outright and risk a confrontation with the united states, the world's sole super power.
If a nation declares war on Israel, the US policy is that the US would come to Israel's defense. And the German's care too much about their economy to risk military confrontation with either Israel or America.
And the French, are just way too divided at home with all their strikes and violent protests that are totally paralyzing their country. France would not stand a chance even against its european neighbors.

except that France and Germany would not be so dumb as to attack Israel outright and risk a confrontation with the united states, the world's sole super power.
If a nation declares war on Israel, the US policy is that the US would come to Israel's defense. And the German's care too much about their economy to risk military confrontation with either Israel or America.
And the French, are just way too divided at home with all their strikes and violent protests that are totally paralyzing their country. France would not stand a chance even against its european neighbors.

I looked at your posts,then looked at your post counts,then understood.Your an idiot.There is no way in hell that USA would attack any European country,nor would Israel for that matter.The USA would not attack Germany,or any other European country,for losing most of it's allies.Not ever.

Actually, you're the only one making any assumptions here. I don't have a clue whether those buildings were actually the homes of terrorists or not; neither do you.
Now you stand corrected.
Many, if not most Palestinians want to live in peace (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6135912.stm). The people that do not are Hamas, and the folk that thrive when there is chaos.
"They were all killed - pieces!" he shouted as he wept. "Thrown in pieces. I saw them! I put them in a sack! Eighteen people - they were killed."
But he said there should be no retaliatory suicide bombings.
"I don't like it," he said. "I myself don't like it. I am more than 70 years old. I want to live in peace!"

Israel targets houses that have only tenuous links (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5398752.stm) to terrorists.
"On 24 August, at 23.30, someone from the Israeli army called me on the phone and ordered me to leave my home quickly.
The reason they gave was that one of my sons is planning attacks against Israel.
But this son hasn't lived with me since 2004. He lives in the middle of Gaza, between Gaza City and Khan Younis, in Nasiriya Camp."

You apparently have the assumption that enough force is applied all at once, then further action will be discouraged. And thus, you suffer from the same delusion that both Israel and the US military command suffer from: nothing breaks the human spirit. It didn't stop the christians, and it certainly didn't stop the jews, and they were both subject to more excruciating tortures. bombings and mass murders like you would like to see will do nothing except warp even more Palestinians into terrorism.

...What the hell are you talking about?
That's just stupid."Omg,France and Germany attacked us,let's bomb those countries and provoke the rest of Europe into a conflict!
Not only that,let's lose the USA's backing!Hell yeah!"

NOOOOOOOO.That is stupid.

If France/Germany were the aggressors in that they bombed Israel, the rest of Europe is very unlikely to support them.
Further, Israel is a closer ally of the US than most nations in Europe. Closer e even than the UK. The US is more likely to back Israel than France or Germany.

Same here. But I'd rather be alive and homeless than dead. One of those situations is rectifiable.

Hmm,true.I do see your point,don't get me wrong.I just don't see how striking those civilians could ever have been a good idea.It would have provoked outrage on a massive scale,and Israel would have been seen as the uber-demons of the Middle East.Not good,for anyone.Unless your Iran,or Hamas,who are DYING for an excuse to annihlate Israel.

there is realistically nothing that France or Germany can do about it. Israel would simply be able to retaliate by capturing or killing them and then possibly attacking the French/German homelands since France and Germany would be violating Israeli soverinty hence committing an act of against Israel. The Europeans would lose to Israel.

You've lost your mind. There is no way that either Germany or France would lose to Israel. Heck, Germany's population is TWELVE TIMES Israel's. There's no way Israel could ever attack a European nation.

If France/Germany were the aggressors in that they bombed Israel, the rest of Europe is very unlikely to support them.
Further, Israel is a closer ally of the US than most nations in Europe. Closer e even than the UK. The US is more likely to back Israel than France or Germany.

They wouldn't condone it,but they wouldn't join Israel.France and Germany would wipe the floor with Israel.And the USA would not get involved,they would not get into a conflict with Europe-it's army is too overstretched.Chances are it would remain neutral,actually.Hence Israel would lose.

I looked at your posts,then looked at your post counts,then understood.Your an idiot.There is no way in hell that USA would attack any European country,nor would Israel for that matter.The USA would not attack Germany,or any other European country,for losing most of it's allies.Not ever.

Israel would if they thought it was necessary for self defense. They won't just sit by and let France bomb them.

The USA really doesn't have any allies in Europe. Israel is more of a US ally than Europe is. They have common interests. Europe doesn't have common interests with the US.

Your first sentence really has a lot to do with anything and really contributes to proving your point.

The only thing that would prevent such a conflict is that the Germans care too much about their precious economy and France has already crippled itself internally.

You apparently have the assumption that enough force is applied all at once, then further action will be discouraged. And thus, you suffer from the same delusion that both Israel and the US military command suffer from: nothing breaks the human spirit. It didn't stop the christians, and it certainly didn't stop the jews, and they were both subject to more excruciating tortures. bombings and mass murders like you would like to see will do nothing except warp even more Palestinians into terrorism.

Well...no, actually. As I said, you're the only one making any assumptions. The kind of community punishment system you're describing never works. In fact, it usually backfires on those conducting it. Why are you assuming I support something so stupid?

All I am saying, and all I have said, is that you should not allow human shield tactics to succeed, in any case, because that encourages their use and increases casualties in the long term.

They wouldn't condone it,but they wouldn't join Israel.France and Germany would wipe the floor with Israel.And the USA would not get involved,they would not get into a conflict with Europe-it's army is too overstretched.Chances are it would remain neutral,actually.Hence Israel would lose.

Europe would not side with France or Germany. As I've stated, France would not be able to last long in a real war with Israel or anyone else. They're on the verge of civil war already.
Germany cares more about money than anything else. Anything that hurts the economy would not be supported by the Germans. That's why they didn't support Gulf War II cause it caused them economic pains.

Israel would if they thought it was necessary for self defense. They won't just sit by and let France bomb them.

The USA really doesn't have any allies in Europe. Israel is more of a US ally than Europe is. They have common interests. Europe doesn't have common interests with the US.

Your first sentence really has a lot to do with anything and really contributes to proving your point.

The only thing that would prevent such a conflict is that the Germans care too much about their precious economy and France has already crippled itself internally.

No Israel wouldn't.They have something you don't have-common sense.They would be beaten very very soundly by most European countries.
My first sentence was just stating the obvious,really.
And yes,the USA does have allies in Europe.The UK being an obvious one.USA-German relationships are on the rise,Bush has been visiting Merkel a lot recently.

If France/Germany were the aggressors in that they bombed Israel, the rest of Europe is very unlikely to support them.
Further, Israel is a closer ally of the US than most nations in Europe. Closer e even than the UK. The US is more likely to back Israel than France or Germany.
first of all, the UK isn't an ally, it's a lapdog. Second of all, it is not a question of who is the ally, but the cost to the US. If Israel declared war on France or Germany because they shot down an Israeli plane violating its treaties, the Israel would be the aggressor. And very likely the EU would support them. Israel is only an 'ally' of the US insofar as it does the Americans' bidding, same as the UK. If you really listen to American politicians, you will eventually realize many are not pro-Israel, they are anti-Arab. It would not be useful to support a puppet against people who are major trading partners.

and besides, we'd have to go through that freedom fries crap again.

Israel would if they thought it was necessary for self defense. They won't just sit by and let France bomb them.
They'd have their crappy navy blown apart by the French and Germans before they even got to Cyprus. They have no force projection capabilities at all.
The USA really doesn't have any allies in Europe. Israel is more of a US ally than Europe is. They have common interests.
Yep. Blowing up people in the Middle East.
Europe doesn't have common interests with the US.
Economic interests...
The only thing that would prevent such a conflict is that the Germans care too much about their precious economy and France has already crippled itself internally.
France isn't internally crippled, whatever faux news might tell you. And the Germans care about their economy, but they also care about the world's view of them, and if they are seen to be ignoring Israel's actions, that could hamper things.

Although doubtless there'd be issues with the Bund fighting the IDF with the whole Jewish thing involved.

You've lost your mind. There is no way that either Germany or France would lose to Israel. Heck, Germany's population is TWELVE TIMES Israel's. There's no way Israel could ever attack a European nation.

Unlike a game like nationstates, in real life, your nation's population does not determine your military strength. China is way bigger than the US in terms of population but the US would still whoop China's butt.

Israel's technology is superior to Frances or Germany's. How can this be? Because Israel uses American technology which has already been proven in war games to be far superior to what the Europeans have.


The other reason French and German peacekeepers won't attack Israel is the Israeli nuclear deterrent. You simply don't go around attacking countries with nukes no matter what the reason is.

Hmm,true.I do see your point,don't get me wrong.I just don't see how striking those civilians could ever have been a good idea.It would have provoked outrage on a massive scale,and Israel would have been seen as the uber-demons of the Middle East.Not good,for anyone.Unless your Iran,or Hamas,who are DYING for an excuse to annihlate Israel.

Yes, it would have been a terrible outrage - for five, ten minutes. We're so used to seeing terrible things happen "over there" that it wouldn't have made much more than a blip in the West. AS for the Middle East - Israel gets blamed for everything anyway. So what if this time the story is actually the truth instead of yet another Al-Jazeera lie? Israel doesn't get good publicity anyway.

But I think people would think twice about getting in the way of the next bombing run.

No Israel wouldn't.They have something you don't have-common sense.They would be beaten very very soundly by most European countries.
My first sentence was just stating the obvious,really.
And yes,the USA does have allies in Europe.The UK being an obvious one.USA-German relationships are on the rise,Bush has been visiting Merkel a lot recently.

You don't know Israel then. Israel will always use all means necessary to defend its soveriegnty. And the Europeans would not back or support either France or Germany. Both would be on their own.

You don't know Israel then. Israel will always use all means necessary to defend its soveriegnty. And the Europeans would not back or support either France or Germany. Both would be on their own.
France and Germany even individually could kick Israel's arse royally.

first of all, the UK isn't an ally, it's a lapdog. Second of all, it is not a question of who is the ally, but the cost to the US. If Israel declared war on France or Germany because they shot down an Israeli plane violating its treaties, the Israel would be the aggressor. And very likely the EU would support them. Israel is only an 'ally' of the US insofar as it does the Americans' bidding, same as the UK. If you really listen to American politicians, you will eventually realize many are not pro-Israel, they are anti-Arab. It would not be useful to support a puppet against people who are major trading partners.

and besides, we'd have to go through that freedom fries crap again.

Our interests in the middle east correspond more closely to Israel's than it does to Europes.
It is unlikely that Israel would go to war with France or Germany over just one plane though they would destroy the French/German contingents in the area in response to attack on the plane.

The Israelis are fighting terrorism. That alone justifies what they are doing.

Unlike a game like nationstates, in real life, your nation's population does not determine your military strength. China is way bigger than the US in terms of population but the US would still whoop China's butt.

Israel's technology is superior to Frances or Germany's. How can this be? Because Israel uses American technology which has already been proven in war games to be far superior to what the Europeans have.


The other reason French and German peacekeepers won't attack Israel is the Israeli nuclear deterrent. You simply don't go around attacking countries with nukes no matter what the reason is.

No,the USA would not "whoop China's butt," not in any sense of the phrase.China has an infinitely bigger army than the US,plus they're technology ain't all too shabby.

The Israelis are fighting terrorism. That alone justifies what they are doing.
So are the Palestinians. And this conflict has been the same for thousands of years.

Our interests in the middle east correspond more closely to Israel's than it does to Europes.
It is unlikely that Israel would go to war with France or Germany over just one plane though they would destroy the French/German contingents in the area in response to attack on the plane.

The Israelis are fighting terrorism. That alone justifies what they are doing.

"Just war" is the biggest contradiction since "good song from Britney Spears."

Yeah you're right. :rolleyes:

China can easily beat the US cause China's world war II technology (of which its military equipment almost entirely consists) can easily beat America's modern technology.

:rolleyes:

The other reason French and German peacekeepers won't attack Israel is the Israeli nuclear deterrent. You simply don't go around attacking countries with nukes no matter what the reason is.
the nuclear card is not a carte blanche. This is the stupidest thing you've said on the forums today, yet. The cold war proved that no one is willing to use nuclear weaponry. Israel would get annihilated several times over if it launched nuclear weaponry. It is so small that it is possible to leave no single patch of earth unscorched. even if it didn't, admission of its capabilities, and willingness to use them, would assure that the arab league all developed weaponry in the region. the US would have to back off its support of Israel in that case, because it knows it cannot possibly defend its whole coastline against smuggled warheads.

Yeah you're right. :rolleyes:

China can easily beat the US cause China's world war II technology (of which its military equipment almost entirely consists) can easily beat America's modern technology.

:rolleyes:

I'm not saying China would win.I'm saying the USA would be given a hard time.
Wait...doesn't China have nukes?Funny,I thought you said attacking a country with a nuclear deterrent was stupid under any circumstances.
Hypocrite.

Yeah you're right. :rolleyes:

China can easily beat the US cause China's world war II technology (of which its military equipment almost entirely consists) can easily beat America's modern technology.

:rolleyes:
Urmm yes... it's not like the Chinese have advanced their military at all in the last 20 years or anything.

See the Type 95, the J-10 and a vast plethora of other examples. And standard issue for the PLA is, IIRC, the Type 81 rifle. They also have a huge amount of Type 56s (can't beat an AK47-variant when you just want to fight, and very hard) and a very disciplined professional army.

Not including the fact that it has about 500 million males, a great of whom have served military service.

"Just war" is the biggest contradiction since "good song from Britney Spears."

Why don't you just come right out and say you are opposed to all war. Instead of this "europeans would be beat everybody" stuff that makes it look like you don't know what you are talking about?
After all that is what you are really concerned about. Isn't is? That you are opposed to any war. So you are just making some rationalizations to prove to yourself that there will be no war between Israel and France/Germany.

Though you really don't have to rationalize cause their won't be a war. But not for the reasons you are saying.

Unlike a game like nationstates, in real life, your nation's population does not determine your military strength. China is way bigger than the US in terms of population but the US would still whoop China's butt.

No, the US would not "whoop China's butt." And population has a massive effect on military strength; Israel can only produce a few thousand soldiers, while Germany or France could produce several million.

Israel's technology is superior to Frances or Germany's. How can this be? Because Israel uses American technology which has already been proven in war games to be far superior to what the Europeans have.

I can't speak for France, but Germany has one of the most technologically advanced militaries in the world. Many states use German technology, especially it's tanks.

The other reason French and German peacekeepers won't attack Israel is the Israeli nuclear deterrent. You simply don't go around attacking countries with nukes no matter what the reason is.

France has nukes too, and Germany could have nukes by the end of the month if they wanted, because they have the technology.

Seriously dude, you're talking out of your ass. Just, stop, already. Ok?

This is the stupidest thing you've said on the forums today

I dunno.I'm finding it hard to decide.

Our interests in the middle east correspond more closely to Israel's than it does to Europes.
It is unlikely that Israel would go to war with France or Germany over just one plane though they would destroy the French/German contingents in the area in response to attack on the plane.

The Israelis are fighting terrorism. That alone justifies what they are doing.
lol "unlikely to go to war" and "destroy contingents in the area" are mutually exclusive. If at all possible, think before you type.

US interests in the middle east are purely oil. they are thus economic, and the US would never jeopordiise its economy for the sake of Israel.

It is unlikely that Israel would go to war with France or Germany over just one plane though they would destroy the French/German contingents in the area in response to attack on the plane.

If that doesn't start a war, nothing will.

No,killing civilians is never justified.I do see where your coming from,and I'm almost inclined to agree,but the libertarian in me says that killing civilians is inexcusable on any level,and I'm glad the Israelis showed restraint this time.

They cross the line from civilian to terrorist when they choose to defend the terrorist. A civilian is someone taking no active part in the conflict.

the nuclear card is not a carte blanche. This is the stupidest thing you've said on the forums today, yet. The cold war proved that no one is willing to use nuclear weaponry. Israel would get annihilated several times over if it launched nuclear weaponry. It is so small that it is possible to leave no single patch of earth unscorched. even if it didn't, admission of its capabilities, and willingness to use them, would assure that the arab league all developed weaponry in the region. the US would have to back off its support of Israel in that case, because it knows it cannot possibly defend its whole coastline against smuggled warheads.

The Cold War also proved that countries won't attack countries with nuclear weapons.

I dunno.I'm finding it hard to decide.
I'll fight you too! bring it on! ;)

I'm not saying China would win.I'm saying the USA would be given a hard time.
Wait...doesn't China have nukes?Funny,I thought you said attacking a country with a nuclear deterrent was stupid under any circumstances.
Hypocrite.

Except I'm talking hypothetical and left the nukes out of the equation. Using conventional means, the US would beat China.

The likely of either US or China attacking the other is muted by the unspoken law that countries don't attack countries with nukes.
MAD still applies even though the Cold War is over.

Why don't you just come right out and say you are opposed to all war. Instead of this "europeans would be beat everybody" stuff that makes it look like you don't know what you are talking about?
After all that is what you are really concerned about. Isn't is? That you are opposed to any war. So you are just making some rationalizations to prove to yourself that there will be no war between Israel and France/Germany.

Though you really don't have to rationalize cause their won't be a war. But not for the reasons you are saying.

Oh no!You got me.I'm opposed to war,I'm so ashamed.Let me go crawl into a hole and die of shame.
And at no one did anybody say at any point in this forum that Europeans would beat anybody.We said they would beat Israel.Which is true.
You really can't stop talking out your ass,can you?
By the way,your grammar sucks.Just thought I'd note that.

Except I'm talking hypothetical and left the nukes out of the equation. Using conventional means, the US would beat China.

No, they wouldn't. The war would almost definitely end as a stalemate; the US just wouldn't be able to take China. And vice versa.

Urmm yes... it's not like the Chinese have advanced their military at all in the last 20 years or anything.

See the Type 95, the J-10 and a vast plethora of other examples. And standard issue for the PLA is, IIRC, the Type 81 rifle. They also have a huge amount of Type 56s (can't beat an AK47-variant when you just want to fight, and very hard) and a very disciplined professional army.

Not including the fact that it has about 500 million males, a great of whom have served military service.

Yes. They have been working on modernising their military but at this time their military still consists of equipment from the late 40's to early 50's.

I'll fight you too! bring it on! ;)

*puts up fist* Hell yeah!I'll waste yo ass.
:p

Yes. They have been working on modernising their military but at this time their military still consists of equipment from the late 40's to early 50's.

You do know that nations tend to hold onto technology for a relatively long time, right? Hell, the M-16 is almost 50 years old.

Yes. They have been working on modernising their military but at this time their military still consists of equipment from the late 40's to early 50's.
No, it doesn't. Even Wiki will tell you how wrong you are.

No, it doesn't. Even Wiki will tell you how wrong you are.

Gotta love Wiki :p

It has nothing to do with the Bloody Terrorist Fascist Israelis showing restraint. It is showing the non-violent of the Palestinian people who are tired of having their people being killed and having their houses destroyed.

It is the Israeli government that for 60 years committed War Crimes and Violence against the Palestinian people that have led to these incidents of supporting so called militants, where is the proof.

Good for the Palestinians.

Erm, the people are acting as human shields against people who launced rockets into Israelie civilian centres. Still think that they are non-viloent.

You do know that nations tend to hold onto technology for a relatively long time, right? Hell, the M-16 is 40 years old.

Yes,but they UPGRADE.They aren't using the same M16s they used in 'Nam,Same with the Chinese,they upgrade.

You do know that nations tend to hold onto technology for a relatively long time, right? Hell, the M-16 is 40 years old.

The M16 family is 30 years but the M16A2 series is 20 years old, having come out in the 80's. You might be thinking of the A1 series which was developed for Vietnam and proved itself inefficient. The A2 is superior to the A1.

Gotta love Wiki :p
Unless you're looking for really specialist information, yeah.

france and germany aren't going to go to war against israel, if israel attacks them, they'll withdraw their forces and throw up sanctions, they might fire back in self defense.

germany and france don't have the force projection assets to defeat israel on its own turf and israel doesn't have any desire to fight off of it.

Yes,but they UPGRADE.They aren't using the same M16s they used in 'Nam,Same with the Chinese,they upgrade.

I know, that's the point I'm making.

Erm, the people are acting as human shields against people who launced rockets into Israelie civilian centres. Still think that they are non-viloent.
Yes, because they didn't act violently and did the exact opposite.

The Cold War also proved that countries won't attack countries with nuclear weapons.
what it proved was MAD is a deterrent to war. we do not currently know if Israel is capable of this, since it would have to have a helluva lot of silos that would have been spotted by satellite. if Israel let off one blast would be beyond belief, but it wouldn't survive either the nuclear winter to follow or the scorn of world opinion afterwards. all Israelis would be branded murderers, and very likely every Jew in the world would be held accountable, in the same way Muslims are now.

No, it doesn't. Even Wiki will tell you how wrong you are.

So you use wiki as your source? Do you have any real sources?

I know, that's the point I'm making.

Oh wait.Corrected.Sorry.I'm not particuarly awake,hehe.

The M16 family is 30 years but the M16A2 series is 20 years old, having come out in the 80's. You might be thinking of the A1 series which was developed for Vietnam and proved itself inefficient. The A2 is superior to the A1.

Actually, they're up to the A4 now.

germany and france don't have the force projection assets to defeat israel on its own turf and israel doesn't have any desire to fight off of it.
France certainly does, and remember than if they sent all of their troops in in Zodiacs with G36s attached, that's still a mightier navy than the Israelis can muster.

So you use wiki as your source? Do you have any real sources?

The fact he USED Wiki as a source proves how stupid you are.If Wiki can discredit you,you need to straighten up your debating skills.Badly.

So you use wiki as your source? Do you have any real sources?
Do you have any that they're using 40's and 50's equipment as standard issue to this day?

france and germany aren't going to go to war against israel, if israel attacks them, they'll withdraw their forces and throw up sanctions, they might fire back in self defense.

germany and france don't have the force projection assets to defeat israel on its own turf and israel doesn't have any desire to fight off of it.

Germany and France certainly do have the force projection assets.As we've already concluded,France and Germany would wipe the floor with Israel,in a horrific way.

yeah but think about the falkands, even if you have a carrier and a navy the airforce is still going to trump that, the task force in the falklands was a long way from airbases in argentina the french aren't going to have that luxury in this hypothetical invasion and are going up against guided missiles not iron bombs.

EDIT the germans have something like 15 suitable surface vessels and ONE landing craft.

Do you have any that they're using 40's and 50's equipment as standard issue to this day?
brachiopedia: where the information eats YOU.

Do you have any that they're using 40's and 50's equipment as standard issue to this day?

No,he doesn't.He's fighting a dead cause,to be completely honest.

what it proved was MAD is a deterrent to war. we do not currently know if Israel is capable of this, since it would have to have a helluva lot of silos that would have been spotted by satellite. if Israel let off one blast would be beyond belief, but it wouldn't survive either the nuclear winter to follow or the scorn of world opinion afterwards. all Israelis would be branded murderers, and very likely every Jew in the world would be held accountable, in the same way Muslims are now.

The CIA says that Israel has at least 200 nuclear warheads.

If there was a nuclear war between France and Israel, the world would be as upset with France as they are with Israel.

People would not just go around attacking every Jew in sight for what the Israeli government did.

Israel has a supreme right of self defense. If the French contingent attacks Israel's military then Israel would strike back by either destroying or capturing the French soldiers.

yeah but think about the falkands, even if you have a carrier and a navy the airforce is still going to trump that, the task force in the falklands was a long way from airbases in argentina the french aren't going to have that luxury in this hypothetical invasion and are going up against guided missiles not iron bombs

Missile defense systems for ships have come a long way since 1982. The Falklands prompted that.

yeah but think about the falkands, even if you have a carrier and a navy the airforce is still going to trump that, the task force in the falklands was a long way from airbases in argentina the french aren't going to have that luxury in this hypothetical invasion and are going up against guided missiles not iron bombs

Due to your really bad grammar,I didn't entirely understand that post,but I got the gist that "Air Force pwns Navy." Depends on which nation has the Navy and which nation has the Air Force.France's navy would pwn Israel's air force,and vice versa.

yeah but think about the falkands, even if you have a carrier and a navy the airforce is still going to trump that, the task force in the falklands was a long way from airbases in argentina the french aren't going to have that luxury in this hypothetical invasion and are going up against guided missiles not iron bombs
OTOH the Israelis aren't going to have the luxury of having the enemy's supply chains stretched about 7000 miles, either.

Plus the Argentinian force was fairly well equipped - they had Exocet missiles and good fighters, as well as NVGs for their troops, a luxury 3. Para did not.

Israel has a supreme right of self defense. If the French contingent attacks Israel's military then Israel would strike back by either destroying or capturing the French soldiers.
Not against peacekeepers, it doesn't. They'd be the aggressors, they'd be on the wrong end of international law.

The CIA says that Israel has at least 200 nuclear warheads.

If there was a nuclear war between France and Israel, the world would be as upset with France as they are with Israel.

People would not just go around attacking every Jew in sight for what the Israeli government did.

Israel has a supreme right of self defense. If the French contingent attacks Israel's military then Israel would strike back by either destroying or capturing the French soldiers.

The CIA says it didn't kill JFK,but that's for a different argument.
Depends who started it-if Israel started it,the world would be very much on France's side.
No,but you would get a lot of anti-Jewish propaganda popping up.Would lead to Jew-phobia.
As we've said,France would pwn Israel in most battlefield confrontations.I think you need to stop talking out your ass now.

they did have exocets but they didn't have very many.

the french still only can provide 20 frigates 4 landing craft and one carriers with 40 aircraft.

are the french really going to risk this, the huge proprtion of their navies surface combatants against one of the best (though nowhere near the biggest) airforces in the world?

You forget that Israel has the BEST airforce in the entire middle east. It would cripple the French navy.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/israel/navy-equipment.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/israel/iaf-equipment.htm


http://www.netmarine.net/forces/fan/index.htm
http://www.netmarine.net/aero/aeronefs/index.htm

the french can't put enough boots on israeli soil to defeat israel, even assuming they get all of their marines, all of their airborne and as much of the regular army as they can find ships taken up from trade to carry on shore, its not going to match the israeli army.

also their force projection assets are insufficent to force a landing contested by the israeli airforce.

You forget that Israel has the BEST airforce in the entire middle east. It would cripple the French navy.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/israel/navy-equipment.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/israel/iaf-equipment.htm


http://www.netmarine.net/forces/fan/index.htm
http://www.netmarine.net/aero/aeronefs/index.htm

In the Middle East.
IN THE MIDDLE EAST!!!
Not in Europe.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061119/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_palestinians



Personally I say this makes them targets if they willingly use their bodies to defend terrorists.

Either way, the anti-Israel Nazis on this site have no standing when claiming the "evil Jooz" are trying to commit genocide.

Grar, yes, anyone who opposes Israel's warmongering foreign policy is a NAZI!

People would not just go around attacking every Jew in sight for what the Israeli government did.
This is the same argument as whether civilians should be targeted for supporting a government. but this time it is worse, since Israel claims to be the home country of every jew in the world. islamophobia has already taken hold, wait and see what happens if islamic terrorists ever let off a warhead. People need to project their anger onto something close, and a million people killed by a bomb in New York would be plenty to be angry about. Jews wouldn't even be able to distance themselves from an act of Israel, because it's a helluva lot harder than saying that "some of our people are extremist". and in fact, most jews actively or tacitly support Israel, right or wrong.

it comes back to the notion that the US are supporting Israel because of some moral obligation. please disabuse yourself of this. Israel is supported for the jewish vote, and the anti-arab stance. remove that, and Israel will be left to the sharks.

What are you talking about?! A war between France,Germany and Israel?

Sorry, even if Germany or France would shoot down an Israeli aeroplane, there would be no open war. Probably, there will be an argue, and perhaps France or Germany would send their troops back home.

Israel can't send its army too Europe, they have enough problems at home.

France and Germany have no interest in invading Israel - what would they gain? The governments don't simply send their armies into an area full of terrorists to defend the honor of their country without a strategic goal. They are not like the Bush government.

And I doubt that Israel would simply nuke France or Germany - this would be seen as huge terroristic act, and then even the USA would stop supporting Israel.

So please stay realistic...

And back to topic: For every civilian you kill, ten new terrorists are recruited - it would be very foolish to bomb them! And the Israelis are clever enough to know that, they are not as stupid as the common troll.

We are supporting Israel because of Israel's stance against terrorism. And because the Arab governments are run by Nazis who wish to implement Holocaust II.

We are supporting Israel because of Israel's stance against terrorism. And because the Arab governments are run by Nazis who wish to implement Holocaust II.
Thank you for demonstrating your true intelligence.

No real point in chatting to you any more.

We are supporting Israel because of Israel's stance against terrorism. And because the Arab governments are run by Nazis who wish to implement Holocaust II.

You mean Iran? Not an Arab Government, sorry.

Jordan, Egypt, and Lebanon all have signed peace treaties with Israel, fat lot of good it did Lebanon, eh?

As for Iran, don't Ahmadinejad seriously, the real power lies with the mullahs and the Ayatollahs, they're smart enough to realize a war with Israel would be a very bad thing for Iran and for them. Ahmadinejad is just a mascot, his job is to rouse the people, talk tough and all that...

We are supporting Israel because of Israel's stance against terrorism. And because the Arab governments are run by Nazis who wish to implement Holocaust II.

You just destroyed any remote argument you ever had.
"OMG TEH MOOSLEMS!tHeY ARE OUT TO DEsTRoY OUR RigHTEOUS WHItE COUnTRIeS!"

You're a fucking idiot,you really are.Arab Governments sole purpose is not to implement the Holocaust.It's not like every single Muslim hates Israel and wants to see it's children's blood running through it's streets like a fucking river.Stop generalising,and stop being racist.

You mean Iran? Not an Arab Government, sorry.
Not even Iran wants to go that far. The oft-quoted "wipe Israel off the map" thing is to do with geography education, plus the Persians are pretty canny. They know they couldn't get anything good out of the war.

Not even Iran wants to go that far. The oft-quoted "wipe Israel off the map" thing is to do with geography education, plus the Persians are pretty canny. They know they couldn't get anything good out of the war.

yup, Khameini isn't an idiot, he knows 200 nuclear strikes aren't going to help him, his country, or his people one bit.

yup, Khameini isn't an idiot, he knows 200 nuclear strikes aren't going to help him, his country, or his people one bit.
Exactly.

And knowing that we've just annihilated someone in this argument, I can sleep easier tonight, with all that aggression out of my system. Aaaaaah.

We are supporting Israel because of Israel's stance against terrorism. And because the Arab governments are run by Nazis who wish to implement Holocaust II.
ROFLMAO! :headbang:

the brachiopedia strikes again.

I haven't ever had the chance in the forums to use roflmao :headbang: before, but that was it methinks

EDIT: no seriously, i really am rolling on the floor. every time i read this post i turn hysterical. is there a special 1337 for selfpwnage?

Exactly.

And knowing that we've just annihilated someone in this argument, I can sleep easier tonight, with all that aggression out of my system. Aaaaaah.

Annihlated well and truly.
Actually,I feel a lot better too.It's nice to know I'm not as much of a nooblet as some people.

I haven't ever had the chance in the forums to use roflmao :headbang: before, but that was it methinks

Chance of a lifetime!:p

We are supporting Israel because of Israel's stance against terrorism. And because the Arab governments are run by Nazis who wish to implement Holocaust II.

Learn this lesson: Nazis != Islamic fundamentalist

Nazis think, that the white race is superior to all the other people, including jews. Normaly, they aren't religious at all. They are extrem nationalists. Other nations may be wiped out simply because they are not as good as their nation. They belive, that gaining land for their nation is something very important. They have no problems with attacking other nations.

Islamic fundamentalists belive, that the Islam is the only rightful religion. Their nation isn't important. If they think, that they are attacked by anyone, they go to their holy war to "defend" themselves. (That often means - blowing up civilians) They would never admit that they are attacking anyone! They need a "moral" reason for their war, as only a defence war can be a holy war. (Doesn't that mean that every attacking war is unholy? Hmm...)


So - don't give the fundametalist moral highground, than they won't get more recruits.

We are supporting Israel because of Israel's stance against terrorism. And because the Arab governments are run by Nazis who wish to implement Holocaust II.
You just destroyed any remote argument you ever had.
"OMG TEH MOOSLEMS!tHeY ARE OUT TO DEsTRoY OUR RigHTEOUS WHItE COUnTRIeS!"
wow this is bringing a tear to my eye too. my stomach hurts *sniff*

OMG TEH MOOSLEMS! :D hahaha

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061119/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_palestinians



Personally I say this makes them targets if they willingly use their bodies to defend terrorists.

Either way, the anti-Israel Nazis on this site have no standing when claiming the "evil Jooz" are trying to commit genocide.

The only reason they didnt bomb the site is because they didnt want the bad PR. Especially after the PR hit they took when they massacred women and children in Gaza not too long ago. Lets not fool ourselves into thinking the Israelis did this out of the kindness of their hearts(like its possible:rolleyes: ) or because they care about civilians.

Not even Iran wants to go that far. The oft-quoted "wipe Israel off the map" thing is to do with geography education, plus the Persians are pretty canny. They know they couldn't get anything good out of the war.

It's not just a cliche. He really wants to wipe out the jews. It's not just a reference to geography education. He's talking about destroying a whole nation and wiping out its people. Without the US in the area, he would actually try and carry it out.
The US presence in the area is the MAIN thing that has prevented Iran from starting a war with Israel.

It's not just a cliche. He really wants to wipe out the jews. It's not just a reference to geography education. He's talking about destroying a whole nation and wiping out its people. Without the US in the area, he would actually try and carry it out.
The US presence in the area is the MAIN thing that has prevented Iran from starting a war with Israel.

So the fact the Israel has 200 nukes while Iran has none isn't important then?

wow this is bringing a tear to my eye too. my stomach hurts *sniff*

OMG TEH MOOSLEMS! :D hahaha

:D Only trying to please.
Sig it if you will,I like being in people's sigs:)

So the fact the Israel has 200 nukes while Iran has none isn't important then?

Iran will have one soon enough do European and Russian unwillingness to do what is necessary to stop them from getting one: which is launching military strikes against Iranian sites.

Going back to the Israel vs. France argument, since it's only last page. Israel can literally mobilize its entire nation into a state of war in the matter of a day (see the six day war). This gives it a fighting force the size of the Chinese army, but with American-grade technology. France can't do anything like that, and would lose. It's really that simple.

It's not just a cliche. He really wants to wipe out the jews. It's not just a reference to geography education. He's talking about destroying a whole nation and wiping out its people. Without the US in the area, he would actually try and carry it out.
The US presence in the area is the MAIN thing that has prevented Iran from starting a war with Israel.
that and having to cross iraq and jordan to to get there (http://almashriq.hiof.no/general/900/910/912/maps/middle.east.gif). in case you haven't noticed, iraq and iran aren't really all that friendly-like.

however, notice that that map is from some server named almashriq. you may want to find a more american map to convince yourself it isn't propaganda.

Iran will have one soon enough do European and Russian unwillingness to do what is necessary to stop them from getting one: which is launching military strikes against Iranian sites.
last i looked, european and russian unwillingness were not a match for american willingess. or perhaps you haven't noticed that your government has left you sitting at the hawk table all by yourself with the cheque?

that and having to cross iraq and jordan to to get there (http://almashriq.hiof.no/general/900/910/912/maps/middle.east.gif). in case you haven't noticed, iraq and iran aren't really all that friendly-like.

however, notice that that map is from some server named almashriq. you may want to find a more american map to convince yourself it isn't propaganda.

they don't have to go through Jordan. You forgot they allied with Syria. All they have to do is go through Iraq. And they are doing everything they can clandestinely to gain control of Iraq. The shiite insurgents and the foreign jihadists in Iraq are trained and funded by Iran much like Hezbollah.

Going back to the Israel vs. France argument, since it's only last page. Israel can literally mobilize its entire nation into a state of war in the matter of a day (see the six day war). This gives it a fighting force the size of the Chinese army, but with American-grade technology. France can't do anything like that, and would lose. It's really that simple.

No,the Israeli Army would not be as big as the Chinese one,because China's population is infinitely bigger.Like,millions of people bigger.
France would not lose.Chances are Europe would condemn the attack,and the EU would aid France.France would not lose.

last i looked, european and russian unwillingness were not a match for american willingess. or perhaps you haven't noticed that your government has left you sitting at the hawk table all by yourself with the cheque?

You do know that Israel has already said that America doesn't take action soon, they will.

No,the Israeli Army would not be as big as the Chinese one,because China's population is infinitely bigger.Like,millions of people bigger.
France would not lose.Chances are Europe would condemn the attack,and the EU would aid France.France would not lose.

The only countries France can beat are third world countries. Israel is not a third world country. They are very westernized and very very modern with the strongest economy in the whole middle east.

It's not just a cliche. He really wants to wipe out the jews. It's not just a reference to geography education. He's talking about destroying a whole nation and wiping out its people. Without the US in the area, he would actually try and carry it out.
The US presence in the area is the MAIN thing that has prevented Iran from starting a war with Israel.

Read my lips: Ahmadinejad=/=Iranian Government


The power lies with the clerics not him.

they don't have to go through Jordan. You forgot they allied with Syria. All they have to do is go through Iraq. And they are doing everything they can clandestinely to gain control of Iraq. The shiite insurgents and the foreign jihadists in Iraq are trained and funded by Iran much like Hezbollah.

Actually,the Iraqi insurgents are mostly untrained men who are fighting because of their religion.Chances are they've seen they're family butchered,they're homes destroyed,and they want revenge.It's a bit like the Somalian insurgents-most were untrained.

No,killing civilians is never justified.I do see where your coming from,and I'm almost inclined to agree,but the libertarian in me says that killing civilians is inexcusable on any level,and I'm glad the Israelis showed restraint this time.

Killing civilians is ABSOLUTLY justifiable. I say this because you misuse the word "civilian". A civilian is one who is not part of the government or military, it does not mean "innocent person".

Osama Bin Laden is not part of any government or military. He is a civilian.
The second in command of Al Qaeda who died recently? Civilian.
Lee Harvey Oswald? Civilian
Ted Kazinski? Civilian
Tim McVeigh? Civilian
Son of Sam? Civilian

Every single one of the terrorists that orchestrated 9/11? Civilians.

There are many, MANY occassions when killing a civilian is justified. I imagine when you have one with a bomb strapped to his chest running towards you, or when you have one holding an assault rifle threatening a crowd, or when they're about to take a shot at the president, these are all examples when I'd find it perfectly acceptable to kill a civilian.

You equate "civilian" with "innocent" and this is wrong. Civilians have certainly capacity for villany and evil, 9/11, oklahoma city bombings, unibomber, boston strangler, etc etc etc. All civilians.

It's never excusable to intentionally target INNOCENT civilians. Now the question is...were they innocent?

of course france wouldn't lose, the israelis can't get to france and france can't get enough troops to israel to matter so its a moot point.

The only countries France can beat are third world countries. Israel is not a third world country. They are very westernized and very very modern with the strongest economy in the whole middle east.

"While losing horrifically in an argument,I'm going to go France-bashing in an attempt to restore some face!"
No.

You do know that Israel has already said that America doesn't take action soon, they will.

Source please.

Killing civilians is ABSOLUTLY justifiable. I say this because you misuse the word "civilian". A civilian is one who is not part of the government or military, it does not mean "innocent person".

Osama Bin Laden is not part of any government or military. He is a civilian.
The second in command of Al Qaeda who died recently? Civilian.
Lee Harvey Oswald? Civilian
Ted Kazinski? Civilian
Tim McVeigh? Civilian
Son of Sam? Civilian

Every single one of the terrorists that orchestrated 9/11? Civilians.

There are many, MANY occassions when killing a civilian is justified. I imagine when you have one with a bomb strapped to his chest running towards you, or when you have one holding an assault rifle threatening a crowd, or when they're about to take a shot at the president, these are all examples when I'd find it perfectly acceptable to kill a civilian.

You equate "civilian" with "innocent" and this is wrong. Civilians have certainly capacity for villany and evil, 9/11, oklahoma city bombings, unibomber, boston strangler, etc etc etc. All civilians.

It's never excusable to intentionally target INNOCENT civilians. Now the question is...were they innocent?

Well...chances are they didn't want their homes destroyed.I already argued this with someone else,if someone was aiming at my house,and all my wordly possessions with a guided missile,I'd stand in the way.

But I do agree with your separating of "innocent" and "civilian," althought it could be argued it is a very very small minority of civilians that are evil.

Actually,the Iraqi insurgents are mostly untrained men who are fighting because of their religion.Chances are they've seen they're family butchered,they're homes destroyed,and they want revenge.It's a bit like the Somalian insurgents-most were untrained.

Have you even been to Iraq? There are Iranian intelligence operatives there who are secretly arming and training the insurgents. People who have been to Iraq are in a position to know these things. If you have never been to Iraq to see for yourself, you should stop while you are ahead cause you are not helping yourself by clinging to your empty ideological arguments that have no basis in the reality of what is actually happening in Iraq.
Iran wants the US out of Iraq so it can take over Iraq. That is why it is supporting the insurgents. That's why the Iraqis don't want the US to pull out its troops cause once the Americans leave, the Iranians will come in. The Iraqis don't want that.

Have you even been to Iraq? There are Iranian intelligence operatives there who are secretly arming and training the insurgents. People who have been to Iraq are in a position to know these things. If you have never been to Iraq to see for yourself, you should stop while you are ahead cause you are not helping yourself by clinging to your empty ideological arguments that have no basis in the reality of what is actually happening in Iraq.
Iran wants the US out of Iraq so it can take over Iraq. That is why it is supporting the insurgents. That's why the Iraqis don't want the US to pull out its troops cause once the Americans leave, the Iranians will come in. The Iraqis don't want that.

Got a source for that?

Have you even been to Iraq? There are Iranian intelligence operatives there who are secretly arming and training the insurgents. People who have been to Iraq are in a position to know these things. If you have never been to Iraq to see for yourself, you should stop while you are ahead cause you are not helping yourself by clinging to your empty ideological arguments that have no basis in the reality of what is actually happening in Iraq.
Iran wants the US out of Iraq so it can take over Iraq. That is why it is supporting the insurgents. That's why the Iraqis don't want the US to pull out its troops cause once the Americans leave, the Iranians will come in. The Iraqis don't want that.

Wait...have you been to Iraq?
I'm sure there are Iranian intelligence officials in Iraq.
But they don't want Iraq.They really don't.There isn't a bunch of Iranian people sitting round a war table discussing where to invade Iraq,because it just won't happen.Iran does not want Iraq.
They do want the Americans out of Iraq,simply because they hate the Americans.It's pretty simple.

EDIT:Also,if they are secretly arming and training these people,how are people in Iraq supposed to know these things?
That defeats the idea of it being secret,ya' know.

No,the Israeli Army would not be as big as the Chinese one,because China's population is infinitely bigger.Like,millions of people bigger.
France would not lose.Chances are Europe would condemn the attack,and the EU would aid France.France would not lose.

China's population is infinitely bigger?

China currently has an army about 2.5 million strong at the moment. If Israel mobilized its army, it has a population of nearly 7 million to draw on. So if they take a third of the population (which isn't unreasonable), you're talking about an army the size of China's.

I think this website describes it best

http://www.desert-voice.net/israeli_file.htm

Military manpower, availability: Males age 15-49, 1,499,186; females age 15-49, 1,462,063; 2000 estimate.

Three million!!!! That beats China's army right there. And don't say "well, france could draft too". Israel has always been prepared to put the entire nation at war within days, France isn't (few countries are)

vs. france, which has

http://www.warfarehq.com/articles/toaw_articles/2003FrenchOOB.shtml

At the end of the restructuring, the French Army size has decreased from 550,000 to somewhere close to 280,000 soldiers

So they start up a war. Israel mobilizes. France is now outnumbered 10 to 1. They'd be on the defensive from the start, and would lose any troops in the region immediately

Here's a link of Military size throughout the world.....

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

I still think if Israel had hardcore facts that the people inside the houses were known terrorists using the houses to stockpile weapons, they should have fired upon it anyhow, since they did in fact warn before hand and then the people chose to become human sheilds. It would have sent a messege Not to protect the terrorists and not to get in the middle to attempt to save known terrorists.

This is simply how I feel on the situation and keyword was hardcore facts.

With Israel not firing does make me wonder if they didn't have facts but speculation, so they decided not to fire upon the houses. In this case, I agree that this is a smart move on Israel's part.

It's not just a cliche. He really wants to wipe out the jews. It's not just a reference to geography education. He's talking about destroying a whole nation and wiping out its people. Without the US in the area, he would actually try and carry it out.
The US presence in the area is the MAIN thing that has prevented Iran from starting a war with Israel.
Yeah... umm... any proof for this at all?

China's population is infinitely bigger?

China currently has an army about 2.5 million strong at the moment. If Israel mobilized its army, it has a population of nearly 7 million to draw on. So if they take a third of the population (which isn't unreasonable), you're talking about an army the size of China's.

I think this website describes it best

http://www.desert-voice.net/israeli_file.htm



Three million!!!! That beats China's army right there. And don't say "well, france could draft too". Israel has always been prepared to put the entire nation at war within days, France isn't (few countries are)

vs. france, which has

http://www.warfarehq.com/articles/toaw_articles/2003FrenchOOB.shtml



So they start up a war. Israel mobilizes. France is now outnumbered 10 to 1. They'd be on the defensive from the start, and would lose any troops in the region immediately

Don't forget,those women wouldn't do an awful lot of the fighting.So China already has a million more fighting men.
Also,assuming Israel attacked France,it would invite widespread condemnation from countries in the world,and the EU would almost certainly come to it's aid,in one way or another.
AND,Israel has got an INCREDIBLY long supply line if it wants to wage a war in France,i.e. across the Mediterranean.That's a big area.

There weren't terrorists in the house, they thought there were weapons. Are you going to kill people to destroy weapons? Israel did the right thing, which they usually try to do (despite some people's misperceptions). Killing those people would have served little purpose in the long run, and would have given terrorist organizations more excuses to attack Israel (and would have laid Israel on the same moral level as them)

Don't forget,those women wouldn't do an awful lot of the fighting.So China already has a million more fighting men.

Ok, you're wrong. Sorry. I'm not going to argue about who would win a war against someone that doesn't realize the way one side's army is structured

China's population is infinitely bigger?

China currently has an army about 2.5 million strong at the moment. If Israel mobilized its army, it has a population of nearly 7 million to draw on. So if they take a third of the population (which isn't unreasonable), you're talking about an army the size of China's.

I think this website describes it best

http://www.desert-voice.net/israeli_file.htm



Three million!!!! That beats China's army right there.
No it doesn't. The Chinese, as well as the PLA, have millions upon millions of men who have served military service and could fight.
And don't say "well, france could draft too". Israel has always been prepared to put the entire nation at war within days, France isn't (few countries are)

vs. france, which has

http://www.warfarehq.com/articles/toaw_articles/2003FrenchOOB.shtml



So they start up a war. Israel mobilizes. France is now outnumbered 10 to 1. They'd be on the defensive from the start, and would lose any troops in the region immediately
The French have national service - they could mobilise easily as many soldiers as Israel could reasonably - 3 million is a mere 4 or so% of the French population, after all.

The Israelis also have no force projection at all, whereas the French have a fair navy, which is massively superior to anything the Israelis can field.

There weren't terrorists in the house, they thought there were weapons. Are you going to kill people to destroy weapons? Israel did the right thing, which they usually try to do (despite some people's misperceptions). Killing those people would have served little purpose in the long run, and would have given terrorist organizations more excuses to attack Israel (and would have laid Israel on the same moral level as them)



Ok, you're wrong. Sorry. I'm not going to argue about who would win a war against someone that doesn't realize the way one side's army is structured

Ok.This topic isn't about China's fighting force anyway,so let's leave it,shall we?

Don't forget,those women wouldn't do an awful lot of the fighting.So China already has a million more fighting men.
Also,assuming Israel attacked France,it would invite widespread condemnation from countries in the world,and the EU would almost certainly come to it's aid,in one way or another.
AND,Israel has got an INCREDIBLY long supply line if it wants to wage a war in France,i.e. across the Mediterranean.That's a big area.

Have you even served in the military? You are assuming, wrongly, that women in the military don't fight. That's not only wrong but sexist.

Wait...have you been to Iraq?
I'm sure there are Iranian intelligence officials in Iraq.
But they don't want Iraq.They really don't.There isn't a bunch of Iranian people sitting round a war table discussing where to invade Iraq,because it just won't happen.Iran does not want Iraq.
They do want the Americans out of Iraq,simply because they hate the Americans.It's pretty simple.

EDIT:Also,if they are secretly arming and training these people,how are people in Iraq supposed to know these things?
That defeats the idea of it being secret,ya' know.

Most people don't know but the CIA does.

And as a matter of fact I have been to Iraq. I'm not a coward who sits in an arm chair in a air conditioned office bickering with other people sitting their own air conditioned offices about sending other people to war. I went myself and got first hand knowledge that trumps what the high school activists and university professors put out in their propaganda which in no way reflects what is really going on in Iraq. Ditto for CNN and Fox. If you are basing your information off the news, you should know it is inaccurate.

Have you even served in the military? You are assuming, wrongly, that women in the military don't fight. That's not only wrong but sexist.
Have you?

*edits*

I am bloody worried about who the US is hiring. Because, frankly, you are Leave No Child Behind material.

Don't rely on Cindy Sheehan or the news networks for you information on Iraq. Go there and find out first hand. That is the only way you will learn the truth of what is really happening there.
Don't give much heed to Fox or CNN or the BBC. They give distorted representations of what is happening on the ground there. You have to find out first hand.
Hell you don't even have to join the military. You can just go as a civilian contractor.

Don't rely on Cindy Sheehan or the news networks for you information on Iraq. Go there and find out first hand. That is the only way you will learn the truth of what is really happening there.
Don't give much heed to Fox or CNN or the BBC. They give distorted representations of what is happening on the ground there. You have to find out first hand.
Hell you don't even have to join the military. You can just go as a civilian contractor.
Yes, because you're clearing getting told the truth by your army press types, rather than them trying to keep your morale up or whatever...

Have you?

*edits*

I am bloody worried about who the US is hiring. Because, frankly, you are Leave No Child Behind material.

Have YOU been to Iraq? I think its really cute that people like think this is a joke or nothing more than subject of academic debate in your cool airconditioned classrooms while real people are facing death on the ground in Iraq.

Actually I don't think its cute at all. It's despicably disrespectful to the soldiers and the Iraqis.


To you this is nothing more than academic debate on an internet forum, to the soldiers in Iraq and to the Iraqi people its not a matter of academic debate, for them its a matter of life and death.

Yes, because you're clearing getting told the truth by your army press types, rather than them trying to keep your morale up or whatever...

Its not about the army press types. Its about seeing it first hand. Go and see for yourself or are you afraid?

Israel's technology is superior to Frances or Germany's. How can this be? Because Israel uses American technology which has already been proven in war games to be far superior to what the Europeans have.
Is that the reason why they are buying German submarines?
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1154525926927&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull

Or use German technology in their tank barrels (Rheinmetall) and motors (MTU)?
Or that - instead of the U.S. Humvee - the IDF ordered the German Dingo (KMW) instead?

Why?

Why does it always come down to this?

Its not about the army press types. Its about seeing it first hand. Go and see for yourself or are you afraid?
Yes, I am afraid, actually.

Because I won't be helping at all, and I'll be an easy target. Not really something I want, and going over there's not something I believe would be a good decision.

Sorry, are you trying to say I'm some kind of chicken for not wanting to get kidnapped or shot for a worthless cause?

Trilby63;11969570']Why?

Why does it always come down to this?
Because people in the US military seem to claim that they have MONSTAH BALLS when they're getting fucked over in an argument.

Because people in the US military seem to claim that they have MONSTAH BALLS when they're getting fucked over in an argument.

Why?

Surely that would mean more chafing!

Trilby63;11969585']Why?

Surely that would mean more chafing!
The US military has no such thing as chafing, OORAH.

Yes, the Israelis showed their usual restraint today by only killing one passerby in an air attack on a civilian highway.

Source?


I find this ironic in the extreme

Have you even served in the military? You are assuming, wrongly, that women in the military don't fight. That's not only wrong but sexist.

Buddy, in the US women can't get drafted. In Israel it's different, but your post is kind of ridiculous

You disgust me.

They're people, you bastard. Living, real people, with names just like you or I.

If a foreign power attacked your state and said they were going to bomb a resistance member's house near yours, would you honestly think that staying at home and letting it happen was the right thing to do?

Or would you view those that helped as 'military assets'?

well, it sounds like they want to die to me. why deny them?

First of all, Israel has mandatory military service, so it could call nearly its entire population to fight. Call it at 5 million soldiers (Israel's population is 6 million, and most of the Arabs do not serve - they are exempt, for being Arabs). This is a similarly sized military to that of the United States, and likely larger than the French military.

Second, Israel has about the best-trained military in the world. Or at least one of the best. The French, well I don't think that the average French soldier is a pansy (actually, given how the French have performed on the battlefield in the past, he probably isn't), but the French are not of the same caliber as the Israelis. They certainly don't have the experience of their Israeli counterparts.

That said, France undoubtably has the superior navy. I'd call it a draw - France can't beat Israel on the ground, and Israel doesn't have the long-range deployment capability. Fact: Israel has never sent ground troops against a nation that did not share a common border with Israel.
Except in the face of an outright Israeli attack on German troops, I doubt the Germans would attack the Israelis, due to their guilt complex over the Holocaust.

Oh, and regarding Iran: Israel is probably drawing up all sorts of attack plans in case they have to disable Iran's nuclear program by force. Israel will NOT allow Iran to obtain nuclear weapons. If it has to, Israel would use its own nukes to destroy Iran's nuclear program (preferably while Ahmadinejad is conducting an inspection).

First of all, Israel has mandatory military service, so it could call nearly its entire population to fight. Call it at 5 million soldiers (Israel's population is 6 million, and most of the Arabs do not serve - they are exempt, for being Arabs). This is a similarly sized military to that of the United States, and likely larger than the French military.

Second, Israel has about the best-trained military in the world. Or at least one of the best. The French, well I don't think that the average French soldier is a pansy (actually, given how the French have performed on the battlefield in the past, he probably isn't), but the French are not of the same caliber as the Israelis. They certainly don't have the experience of their Israeli counterparts.France has the disadvantage of not believing to be god's chosen seed defending the promised land.

France has the disadvantage of not believing to be god's chosen seed defending the promised land.

france is the promised land of the french!:)

That just proves that all this civilian casualty BS is absolutely not Israel's fault. They should have taken pictures, lots of them and dropped a bomb.

Because people in the US military seem to claim that they have MONSTAH BALLS when they're getting fucked over in an argument.

You must be referring to the academic argument (that's all it is afterall) that has no bearing or reflection of the actual reality on the ground.

You seem to be getting your arguments from Murtha, Pelosi, Dean, Sheehan, that one British fellow who looks and talks like an alcoholic. The problem is that those people are ideologically biased. Murtha was heavily rejected for House majority leader recently. That's a huge blow to his and Pelosi's demand for an immediate withdrawal of American troops from Iraq. Because most of the new Dems, like most normal Americans, realize that leaving Iraq now will cause is disintegration and domination by Iran. That's why Bush still will not sign on to an immediate timetable for pulling troops out in 4 months. He knows, Congress knows, the majority of Americans know, that it is simply too dangerous and irresponsible to do such a thing.

When things get hot in the kitchen the French, Russians, and Chinese and the others run and hide. The Americans on the other hand stay and try to put out the fire and restore the damage.
The British, while appearing to follow America everywhere, are actually looking out for their own interests. Their government seems to side with who ever they think is going to come out on top.

Would you prefer to let the fire spread uncontrollably?

Source?


I find this ironic in the extreme



Buddy, in the US women can't get drafted. In Israel it's different, but your post is kind of ridiculous
And you know that how?

In the US, the men can't be drafted either.
The US doesn't even have a draft. If the draft was restored, because of changes that have allowed women to be deployed, it is likely that women would be included. The only way for women to avoid deployment in the US military is if they get themselves pregnant. But if they aren't pregnant, they get to go to the desert just like the men.

Further, they signed a dotted line volunteering to go to Iraq if the government needed them there. In fact there are a hell of a lot of American women serving in Iraq and many of them have come under enemy fire and performed superbly.

You seem to be getting your arguments from Murtha, Pelosi, Dean, Sheehan, that one British fellow who looks and talks like an alcoholic. The problem is that those people are ideologically biased. Murtha was heavily rejected for House majority leader recently. That's a huge blow to his and Pelosi's demand for an immediate withdrawal of American troops from Iraq. Because most of the new Dems, like most normal Americans, realize that leaving Iraq now will cause is disintegration and domination by Iran. That's why Bush still will not sign on to an immediate timetable for pulling troops out in 4 months. He knows, Congress knows, the majority of Americans know, that it is simply too dangerous and irresponsible to do such a thing.

Yet you still have not provided a source for any of this information...

When things get hot in the kitchen the French, Russians, and Chinese and the others run and hide. The Americans on the other hand stay and try to put out the fire and restore the damage.
The British, while appearing to follow America everywhere, are actually looking out for their own interests. Their government seems to side with who ever they think is going to come out on top.
Good ol' american dick-waving.

Would you prefer to let the fire spread uncontrollably?

Would you prefer to not create a false dichotomy?

Israel:
Manpower fit for military service: males age 17-49: 1,255,902.
France:
Manpower fit for military service: males age 17-49: 11,262,661.


It is an insane thought that Israel is going to win a war against France. If Israel mobilizes five million people, that's almost the entire Jewish Population. They still have Druzes and Circassians to rely on. I'm not sure how willing the Arab population will be to fight, except those who volunteered to join the IDF.

Who on earth is going to run the country? Five million people on a population of seven million?

The economy will die. The army will be hit by that.

Yes, I am afraid, actually.

Because I won't be helping at all, and I'll be an easy target. Not really something I want, and going over there's not something I believe would be a good decision.

Sorry, are you trying to say I'm some kind of chicken for not wanting to get kidnapped or shot for a worthless cause?


Well, good for you for admitting that.

So you think that preventing a civil war where hundreds of millions could be killed by Islamic butchers is not a worthy cause?

I guess preventing Iranian attempts to destabilize Iraq is not a worthy cause either?

And further, I wouldn't be too afraid. Despite your news reports, the insurgent attacks on Americans and Europeans are actually few and far between.

When I was there, my base was never once attacked by the insurgents. But we heard other people get attacked. Mostly with mortars which always missed by more 20 feet.
Iraqi hostility whether open or concealed is not found in reality. What you have instead are Iraqis questioning whether America intends to abandon them and let the Iranians take defacto control of the nation through their insurgent surrogates.

They know from seeing your academic political debates on CNN and BBC. Some of them think the British have already made up their minds to abandon Iraq. Many of them are worried that America will do the same. Just like Americans broke their promise to help overthrow Saddam after Gulf War I.

You're not a chicken for wanting to preserve your own life. You would be a fool if you didn't.
But you can't claim to have better knowledge than the people who are or who have just recently been there.

Yet you still have not provided a source for any of this information...


Good ol' american dick-waving.



Would you prefer to not create a false dichotomy?

For me this isn't just an academic argument. For you it is. Cause you have never been there. You don't have to deal with it day in and day out.
You just sit pretty in your air conditioned offices and homes having useless discussions over the internet about things which you have no experience. Meantime, people on the ground in the place you are having academic arguments about, facing real life and death issues. Issues you've never had to face.

Well, good for you for admitting that.

So you think that preventing a civil war where hundreds of millions could be killed by Islamic butchers is not a worthy cause?

I guess preventing Iranian attempts to destabilize Iraq is not a worthy cause either?

And further, I wouldn't be too afraid. Despite your news reports, the insurgent attacks on Americans and Europeans are actually few and far between.

When I was there, my base was never once attacked by the insurgents. But we heard other people get attacked. Mostly with mortars which always missed by more 20 feet.
Iraqi hostility whether open or concealed is not found in reality. What you have instead are Iraqis questioning whether America intends to abandon them and let the Iranians take defacto control of the nation through their insurgent surrogates.

They know from seeing your academic political debates on CNN and BBC. Some of them think the British have already made up their minds to abandon Iraq. Many of them are worried that America will do the same. Just like Americans broke their promise to help overthrow Saddam after Gulf War I.

You're not a chicken for wanting to preserve your own life. You would be a fool if you didn't.
But you can't claim to have better knowledge than the people who are or who have just recently been there.

There is the phrase "can't see the wood for the trees" namely that an individual's experiences in a part of the country don't necessarily constitute a representative sample of the country as a whole.

For me this isn't just an academic argument. For you it is. Cause you have never been there. You don't have to deal with it day in and day out.
You just sit pretty in your air conditioned offices and homes having useless discussions over the internet about things which you have no experience. Meantime, people on the ground in the place you are having academic arguments about, facing real life and death issues. Issues you've never had to face.

In other words, your not going to address anything I say because you regard yourself as superior because of alleged military. The laziest form of debate I know of. The fact is, you cannot refute my argument.

1.) how is my argument irrelevent or false because its academic? All I asked for was evidence, and for you to stop using logical fallacies.

2.) Where is the proof that you've been in Iraq?

So they start up a war. Israel mobilizes. France is now outnumbered 10 to 1. They'd be on the defensive from the start, and would lose any troops in the region immediately

Then France mobilises. Bam, 10 million troops right there.

See, I can be irrational and stupid too.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061119/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_palestinians
Personally I say this makes them targets if they willingly use their bodies to defend terrorists.

Either way, the anti-Israel Nazis on this site have no standing when claiming the "evil Jooz" are trying to commit genocide.

I agree with you; I am, and always will be, PRO-Semitic.:D

Pure speculation on my part: If Israel had solid proof that they were using the houses to store weapons and were militants. I think Israel should have fired on the houses. As for the human sheilds, I'm with President Bush when he said that if you're protecting and supporting the terrorists you are against us. If the civilians knowingly were protecting them and chose to be human shields, then too bad. Israel should have taken the shots.

I agree with you; if these people volunteered to be human shields for the military, then they should get blown away with the military personnel. Besides, using civilians as human shields is a common practice of Palestinians; they work for the military without being rank-and-file members thereof so that they can say "Israel is killing those poor innocent Palestinian civilians!" to gain the world's sympathy and help so they can exterminate the Jews.

Listen, all you anti-Semitics and pro-Palestinians out there: the Jews wandered all over the earth for 1878 years, getting killed, abused, violated, and whatnot, never having any rest. GIVE THEM A BREAK AND LET THEM HAVE THE LAND OF PALESTINE.

If the French and Germany decide to fire upon Israel's Defence Force, it would clearly be an act of war. I'd put my money on Israel. Yes, the USA would ultimately back up Israel.

I certainly HOPE for the USA's sake they would back up Israel!

Hey!
Choosing to be a human shield is a respectable line of work. There's good money in it, too.


:rolleyes:

Yes, but it is a sometimes LETHAL line of work; what good will all that money do you if you get blown away?

It has nothing to do with the Bloody Terrorist Fascist Israelis showing restraint. It is showing the non-violent of the Palestinian people who are tired of having their people being killed and having their houses destroyed.

It is the Israeli government that for 60 years committed War Crimes and Violence against the Palestinian people that have led to these incidents of supporting so called militants, where is the proof.

Good for the Palestinians.

Bloody Terrorist Fascist Israelis? Please tell me that's just sarcasm...

The Israelis are NOT Bloody Terrorist Fascists; they're just defending themselves from Palestinian (and UN) aggression.

Oh, wait a minute, I almost forgot - you bloody terrorist fascist anti-Semites think self-defense on Israel's part is "War Crimes and Violence against the Palestinian people", but it's OK and justified and even commendable that Palestinians (which are the REAL bloody terrorist fascists, NOT Israel) attack Jews.

And if they (the Palestinians) don't want their people killed and their houses destroyed, then they should LEAVE ISRAEL ALONE; their failure to do so is why their people get killed and their houses destroyed, i.e. Israel is defending itself.

And Israel has EVERY RIGHT to defend itself. The Palestinians are the ones who started it all.

Israel wants peace; it is the Palestinians who do NOT.

Personally I say this makes them targets if they willingly use their bodies to defend terrorists.

Either way, the anti-Israel Nazis on this site have no standing when claiming the "evil Jooz" are trying to commit genocide.

Some quick points:

1. Being anti-Israel makes one Anti-Jew in the same way that being Anti-Aprathied makes one Anti-White.

2. What does it say about Israel if it is newsworthy when they DON'T launch an airstrike on unarmed civilains?

3. What does it say about your subconscious knowlege of Israel if YOU think the fact Israel didn't airstrike a bunch of unarmed civilains is something noteworthy/unusual?

When things get hot in the kitchen the French, Russians, and Chinese and the others run and hide. The Americans on the other hand stay and try to put out the fire and restore the damage.

Claiming the Russians run and hide. :confused:
Any credibility you might have had just disappeared.:rolleyes:

Israel:
Manpower fit for military service: males age 17-49: 1,255,902.
France:
Manpower fit for military service: males age 17-49: 11,262,661.

It is an insane thought that Israel is going to win a war against France.
May as well add this into the equation as well:
Military expenditures - percent of GDP:
France: 2.6% (~46 Billion $US)
Israel: 7.7% (~12 Billion $US)

France spends almost 4 times as much on their military as does Israel on theirs.

May as well add this into the equation as well:
Military expenditures - percent of GDP:
France: 2.6% (~46 Billion $US)
Israel: 7.7% (~12 Billion $US)

France spends almost 4 times as much on their military as does Israel on theirs.

If you put that into the equation you must put in the USA too for we will defend Israel over any other nation in the world. Israel is a true ally of the USA.

USA % GDP: 3.7% which in US Dollars=$441.6 billion (FY2006 est.)
Military age 17-45 years old
Total armed forces 2,685,713
Total Population: 300,000,000+

If the scenario between France and Israel would ever become reality (which I really don't feel it will or atleast not from France, Iran they may be stupid enough but not France) the USA may not take immediate physical actions, we would however supply Israel with weaponry and dollars and whatever else, and if it would turn bad for Israel then the USA would get physically involved but we would mostly observe to see how Israel does by themselves but would remain on-call and having positioned our troops strategically to be involved immediately if Israel would need our help.

If you put that into the equation you must put in the USA too for we will defend Israel over any other nation in the world. Israel is a true ally of the USA.


See... I don't see how Israel is Americas ally.

How many wars has Israel helped America in?

Exactly how does America benefit from Israel?

America is Israels ally, but Israel is a pretty crappy ally to America.

See... I don't see how Israel is Americas ally.

How many wars has Israel helped America in?

Exactly how does America benefit from Israel?

America is Israels ally, but Israel is a pretty crappy ally to America.

Israel is an ally of the US. Israel just doesn't participate in the current wars because the US has asked them not to. The reason is simple. How would Iraqis repond to Israeli forces being in their country?

Israel is an ally of the US. Israel just doesn't participate in the current wars because the US has asked them not to. The reason is simple. How would Iraqis repond to Israeli forces being in their country?

Exactly how has Israel ever helped the US?

Exactly how has Israel ever helped the US?

A ton of our military technologyis Israeli. We use them for R & D of stuff like UAVs, communications equipment, RADAR, etc.

As for the current wars, you might recall during the build-up to Iraq, the US asked Sharon not to get involved even if Iraq fired missiles on them.

If you can't see why it is politically impossible for Israel to help the US right now, then you trully need to get a better understanding of the world.

That's why pro-zionazi are so unpopular.

Note: not zionists; these are different. Zionazi are ones that support the notion that non-Jews are a lesser race which life is worth as much as of an animal.

Aren't those Kahanists?

A ton of our military technologyis Israeli. We use them for R & D of stuff like UAVs, communications equipment, RADAR, etc.

As for the current wars, you might recall during the build-up to Iraq, the US asked Sharon not to get involved even if Iraq fired missiles on them.

If you can't see why it is politically impossible for Israel to help the US right now, then you trully need to get a better understanding of the world.

Can you provide evidence of Israeli technology benefiting the US? Particulary given the cost of supporting Israel...

Israel seems to be taking MUCH MUCH more than it gives...

Besides, using civilians as human shields is a common practice of Palestinians; they work for the military without being rank-and-file members thereof so that they can say "Israel is killing those poor innocent Palestinian civilians!" to gain the world's sympathy and help so they can exterminate the Jews..

Rubbish.

Listen, all you anti-Semitics and pro-Palestinians out there: the Jews wandered all over the earth for 1878 years, getting killed, abused, violated, and whatnot, never having any rest. GIVE THEM A BREAK AND LET THEM HAVE THE LAND OF PALESTINE...

There is already an Israeli state. The Palestinians would be more than happy if they'd just go back to it. As would the rest of it.


Bloody Terrorist Fascist Israelis? Please tell me that's just sarcasm...
...

They use collective punishment and reprisals. That is, by definition, a terror tactic. By financing the various "christian" militias in Lebanon, they also financed "terrorism".


The Israelis are NOT Bloody Terrorist Fascists; they're just defending themselves from Palestinian (and UN) aggression....

Please explain what you mean by "UN aggression". Refer to specific incidents in your answer.


Oh, wait a minute, I almost forgot - you bloody terrorist fascist anti-Semites think self-defense on Israel's part is "War Crimes and Violence against the Palestinian people", but it's OK and justified and even commendable that Palestinians (which are the REAL bloody terrorist fascists, NOT Israel) attack Jews.....

Please specify who you mean on this board when using language such as "bloody terrorist facist anti-semites" so the rest of us, as well as the terrorist anti-semites, bloody facists, and terrorist semites do not feel grouped together with them. Thanks.


And if they (the Palestinians) don't want their people killed and their houses destroyed, then they should LEAVE ISRAEL ALONE; their failure to do so is why their people get killed and their houses destroyed, i.e. Israel is defending itself......

If Israel is defending itself, why is the violence in the occupied territories outside Israel and why is Israel building civillian housing there?


And Israel has EVERY RIGHT to defend itself. The Palestinians are the ones who started it all.......

It was the Palestinians who were expelled in 1947, and the Palestinians who are now occupied by Israel. However, should you wish to argue this, feel free. And yes, names dates and a few numbers will be expected rather than arab bashing shite-talk.

Israel wants peace; it is the Palestinians who do NOT.

As it was Israel who left the talks in 2003, and Sharon who refused to sit with Arafat, thats highly debatable.

Exactly how has Israel ever helped the US?
Getting whoever supports them the Jewish vote.

Yeah you're right. :rolleyes:

China can easily beat the US cause China's world war II technology (of which its military equipment almost entirely consists) can easily beat America's modern technology.

:rolleyes:

Damn those Iraqi insurgents and their IEDs! How dare they continue to inflict casualties on our troops instead of bending over and taking it up the ass like good slaves!

So you think that preventing a civil war where hundreds of millions could be killed by Islamic butchers is not a worthy cause?

I guess preventing Iranian attempts to destabilize Iraq is not a worthy cause either?
Well that's the thing. I'm a bit worried that all of this military interference isn't really helping at all, because it's creating problems where there weren't really any before.

Although now if the US leaves the country's also buggered. So what's there to do?
And further, I wouldn't be too afraid. Despite your news reports, the insurgent attacks on Americans and Europeans are actually few and far between.
It's not really my own life that I'm too worried about - it's the lives of the general Iraqi public. My own presence won't be helping the situation a great deal, in fact, it's probably helping to destabilise the whole thing.
When I was there, my base was never once attacked by the insurgents. But we heard other people get attacked. Mostly with mortars which always missed by more 20 feet.
Really depends where you're located, no?
Iraqi hostility whether open or concealed is not found in reality. What you have instead are Iraqis questioning whether America intends to abandon them and let the Iranians take defacto control of the nation through their insurgent surrogates.
They could always get Saddam back off the noose Robin Hood-style. Might not go down to well in Iran, mind.
They know from seeing your academic political debates on CNN and BBC. Some of them think the British have already made up their minds to abandon Iraq.
Ermm we have... we've already given up one of our provinces, and we're redeploying many troops to Hell Province in Afghanistan, to fight there, in another region where the objectives are even more unclear.
Many of them are worried that America will do the same. Just like Americans broke their promise to help overthrow Saddam after Gulf War I.
Well that's also going to happen, isn't it?

You're already having the Iraq War equivalent of Vietnamisation, so it's no surprise that they're worried.
You're not a chicken for wanting to preserve your own life. You would be a fool if you didn't.
There are certain things I would give my life for. Going to Iraq is not one of them.
But you can't claim to have better knowledge than the people who are or who have just recently been there.
True, but in the same fashion, I'm not entirely sure that your viewpoint is going to be unbiased - after all, your unit was probably in one place for most of your time there, and you might have had an easy time of it. This'd blind you to what's going on in other places.

And as is said - the first victim of war is the truth.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061119/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_palestinians



Personally I say this makes them targets if they willingly use their bodies to defend terrorists.

Either way, the anti-Israel Nazis on this site have no standing when claiming the "evil Jooz" are trying to commit genocide.

Firstly before we get into terrorism do you think that the killing of innocent civilians outside a mosque in Beit Hanoun didn't involve an form of terror at all? Secondly I think its great that the Palestinians are coming together and protesting about the Israeli airstrikes as they are inhumane and disproportionate compared to the rockets fired into Israel. Israel was founded by terrorists such as the Haganah, Irgun and the Shern Gang, they sent letter bombs to London and terrorised both the British troops and the Arab populations there to get their own" homeland". So please don't rant on about utter rubbish about the terrorist ruining Israeli freedoms as it is nothing compared to the freedom of Palestinians being removed.

Onto the Nazis if any country in the modern world is acting like Nazis at the minute it has to be Israel. They value Israeli lives at a higher price than Palestinian lives. Just that they manage to have some Americans willing to back them in the UN (also known as defending people who terrorise others) as you posted in your original post. Also I laugh at your comparison between Anti-Semetism and Anti-Zionism in relation to the "evil Jooz". It's nothing to do with the Jews. Some are even against Zionist pigs like yourself. Check out www.jewsagainstzionism.com True Torah Jews against Zionism. I think that my points in relation to the locking out of Palestinians with foreign passports at both Ben Gurion International and the Gaza and Allenby Bridge Crossing also tell me a lot about how much the Israelis don't want any form of Palestinians in the country. The fact that they are taking land from within the West Bank is also sickening this shows that they want all of Israel not part of it and that they don't want any form of Palestinian inside the Israeli border.

To be honest what else do they want to do if they have already locked half the Palestinian population out of their own land and now they are making their areas even smaller with the construction of this blatently racist wall and when they are having "technical malfunctions" with military equipment and when they are taking hundreds of people's lives. This historic Gaza pullout isn't half as historic as it was meant to be apparently. As I have said before the State of Israel shouldn't exist if it is not willing to accept the Arab population living around it and if it is denying the Palestinians their human rights, aside from the fact that they mass immigrated there and that the land that Abraham promised the Jews is also for Muslims and Christians. In addition to that they are forcing Arabs out of Hebron because they believe that Abraham lived there and he was their patriarch. The idiotic thing here is that he is actually the patriarch of Islam and Christianity also.

I'm glad that I could sort out another ignorant Zionist.
feel free to reply as I will continue to put you straight on what really happens on Israel. In the meanwhile if you are willing to submit to the facts please check out www.counterpunch.org for some of the books in relation to Israel and Palestine. Or you could check out some of Norman Finkelstein's stuff. He managed to prove another Zionist pig (Alan Dershowitz) like yourself what the facts were. In addition to that please check out Electronic Intifada (www.electronicintifada.net) to see what the IDF are really doing in Gaza and the West Bank.

*bullshit snip*
1) You have no sense of humour - the "well paid line of work" thing was a joke
2) Palestinians are actually Semites too, so you're being anti-Semitic
3) Your woefully ill-thought out argument disgusts me

Remember, Three-Way, neither side is innocent in this. The Palestinians have done wrong, but so have the Israelis, and it's very important to remember that.

Okay, so Israel will be helped by the USA? Is Israel really more important to the USA than (the entire of) Europe?

imo Israel should give back the occupied territory. The Shebaa farms, Golan Heights should be given back to Syria. The West Bank and Gaza Strip should get independence. And East Jerusalem should go to the West Bank.

Okay, so Israel will be helped by the USA? Is Israel really more important to the USA than (the entire of) Europe?

imo Israel should give back the occupied territory. The Shebaa farms, Golan Heights should be given back to Syria. The West Bank and Gaza Strip should get independence. And East Jerusalem should go to the West Bank.

Well said sir.

A ton of our military technology is Israeli. We use them for R & D of stuff like UAVs, communications equipment, RADAR, etc.

RADAR? The British invented that during WWII I believe.

As for the current wars, you might recall during the build-up to Iraq, the US asked Sharon not to get involved even if Iraq fired missiles on them.
Gee. "Please don't go and do something so stupid that it might cause a regional firestorm". "Oh, ok. But you owe us then".

Yeah... no.

I'm not going back over 250ish posts, but sheesh... ever get tired of regurgitating the same speil in these threads?

Israel will not give back either East Jerusalem or the Golan. East Jerusalem for religious reasons, the Golan for strategic reasons.

Go to the Golan Heights, and you will see why Israel will not give them back to Syria.

"strategic reasons" - I wonder what those are, please elaborate. I'd say they are just keeping the Golan Heights to scare the Syrians militarily. I do hope that some day they will confront Israel for their land back.

Religious Reasons?? Thats bullshit. So Israel is a country based on religion. The Arabs have the Dome of the Rock in there too its not like they don't have religious reason for keeping it. This is the same crap thats coming out of the Israeli settlers mouth when they are trying to push the Arabs out of Hebron. "Religious Reasons"... what a load of crap. This is the reason why a billateral Palestinian state with a secular ethos should be in place there instead of Zionist pigs stealing land for "religious reasons" or "strategic reasons".

"strategic reasons" - I wonder what those are, please elaborate. I'd say they are just keeping the Golan Heights to scare the Syrians militarily. I do hope that some day they will confront Israel for their land back.

Religious Reasons?? Thats bullshit. So Israel is a country based on religion. The Arabs have the Dome of the Rock in there too its not like they don't have religious reason for keeping it. This is the same crap thats coming out of the Israeli settlers mouth when they are trying to push the Arabs out of Hebron. "Religious Reasons"... what a load of crap. This is the reason why a billateral Palestinian state with a secular ethos should be in place there instead of Zionist pigs stealing land for "religious reasons" or "strategic reasons".

The Golan Heights is the premier military asset in Northern Palestine. It literally commands the entire area around it. The fighting to take it from Syria in the Six Day War was some of the bloodiest and most brutal Israel has ever experienced. To give it back to a country that STILL has an avowed goal to destroy Israel would be insane.

AS to East Jerusalem - the Palestinians lost all claim to that in the Yom Kippur war. Israel had agreed to the partitioning of Jerusalem - it was the Palestinians who tried to use the city as a staging point to exterminate the Israelis.

As to the religious side of things - where do you think the Wailing Wall is? At least the Israelis have shown enough respect for Islam to leave the Dome of the Rock alone.

See... I don't see how Israel is Americas ally.

How many wars has Israel helped America in?

Exactly how does America benefit from Israel?

America is Israels ally, but Israel is a pretty crappy ally to America.

Israel would be in the wars that America is and has been in if we would ask them to help. We, America, have asked them to "stand-down", so they did. Israel would love to bomb the Nuke sites in Iran and again America has told them Not to, to wait.

As for the benefits from the Israeli and American alliance, there are a few reasons and the #1 reason is "Strategic Planning", having Israel in the Middle East betters the USA's intelligence in the region. Kind of gives us a foot hold in the Middle East.

Israel would be in the wars that America is and has been in if we would ask them to help. We, America, have asked them to "stand-down", so they did. Israel would love to bomb the Nuke sites in Iran and again America has told them Not to, to wait.
So that would be Zero wars Israel has helped America with?
Did they help out with any that did not involve the ME? Say Vietnam?


As for the benefits from the Israeli and American alliance, there are a few reasons and the #1 reason is "Strategic Planning", having Israel in the Middle East betters the USA's intelligence in the region. Kind of gives us a foot hold in the Middle East.
So... This is more of America helping Israel than vice versa - they give you intelligence so you can help them. How selfless....

The Golan Heights is the premier military asset in Northern Palestine. It literally commands the entire area around it. The fighting to take it from Syria in the Six Day War was some of the bloodiest and most brutal Israel has ever experienced. To give it back to a country that STILL has an avowed goal to destroy Israel would be insane.

AS to East Jerusalem - the Palestinians lost all claim to that in the Yom Kippur war. Israel had agreed to the partitioning of Jerusalem - it was the Palestinians who tried to use the city as a staging point to exterminate the Israelis.

As to the religious side of things - where do you think the Wailing Wall is? At least the Israelis have shown enough respect for Islam to leave the Dome of the Rock alone.

Firstly as in the case of Syria. Of course they are going to be angered when Israeli soldiers pack Palestinians into a tiny area, when Palestinians were the original race who lived there before the Zionist movement even began. Why should people have the right to mass immigrate a country and steal its land and assets. It's beyond me. Even the first leader of Israel said thats what they did. Let me quote David Ben Gurion: "Let us not ignore the truth among ourselves … politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves… The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country.". I think I have answered the first paragraph anyway.

Unto paragraph number two, East Jerusalem is just as much Palestinian as it is Israeli and why should it be kept that way. Are Israel trying to be even more unreasonable than they already are?? Also you still haven't answered my query on Hebron why is it important for them to take the city over because Abraham lived there. Don't Muslims also believe their faith began from Abraham, and Christians too actually. To be fair who is to say the Wailing Wall is less important than the Dome of the Rock Mosque. Are you trying to say that Jewish places of worship are more important than Arab ones? Israelis respect Islam?? Please they killed 11 women outside a mosque in Beit Hanoun, some respect if you ask me. "Exterminating" talk about exaggeration to the extreme. That is what the Israelis are doing to the Palestinians by locking them out and cramping them into small spaces.

To be honest I just think Israelis use religion as an excuse to pursue their Zionist goals. The way they are treating the Palestinians goes against probably the entirety of the prophecy of Isaiah and probably a lot more. Zionism even goes against the Torah and the Tenakah. Please look on www.jewsagainstzionism.com for more.

You disgust me.

They're people, you bastard. Living, real people, with names just like you or I.

If a foreign power attacked your state and said they were going to bomb a resistance member's house near yours, would you honestly think that staying at home and letting it happen was the right thing to do?

Or would you view those that helped as 'military assets'?

Sure they're people, but when they put their lives on the line to defend military assets they're combatants and are subject to being killed by their enemy. I would have bombed the houses.

Sure they're people, but when they put their lives on the line to defend military assets they're combatants and are subject to being killed by their enemy. I would have bombed the houses.

What if you knew for a fact that there were no military assets whatsoever in your neighbour's house? Does that change your decision?

If you put that into the equation you must put in the USA too for we will defend Israel over any other nation in the world. Israel is a true ally of the USA.

*snip*

I got only one acronym for thos who think the USA would support Israel in a fight with either Germany or France: NATO.

At the absolute worst, the US would not interfere. They would be obligated under treaty to assist at least logistically their NATO brethren.

There is just no way the US would pull out of NATO for Israel. Do you honestly think the US is willing to face economical sanction that would cripple them for the next two generation for some religious wingnut over there who are too zealous in their fight against other religious wingnut to pick a fight with the big boys that actually sell weapons?

Remeber people, an attack against one member of NATO is an attack against all of them. A declaration of war is the same.

Sure they're people, but when they put their lives on the line to defend military assets they're combatants and are subject to being killed by their enemy. I would have bombed the houses.

You sicken me, nearly as much as the Jewish settlers in Hebron who broke a Swedish human rights activist's cheekbone and chanted "We killed Jesus and we'll kill you too". Thats how racially disgusting this all is. Read more.

http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=11&ar=687

You sicken me, nearly as much as the Jewish settlers in Hebron who broke a Swedish human rights activist's cheekbone and chanted "We killed Jesus and we'll kill you too". Thats how racially disgusting this all is. Read more.

http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=11&ar=687

Realists don't sicken me. I argue against them, but in the end there are fundamental differences that seperates their opinions from mine. When that happens, we accept it- agree to disagree and walk away.

Nothing to get all antsy about.

Firstly as in the case of Syria. Of course they are going to be angered when Israeli soldiers pack Palestinians into a tiny area, when Palestinians were the original race who lived there before the Zionist movement even began. Why should people have the right to mass immigrate a country and steal its land and assets. It's beyond me. Even the first leader of Israel said thats what they did. Let me quote David Ben Gurion: "Let us not ignore the truth among ourselves … politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves… The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country.". I think I have answered the first paragraph anyway.


That's fine - if you ignore the fact that Ben Gurion and the other founders of Israel practically begged the Palestinians to stay and be part of the Israeli state. I know that there was a lot of ethnic strife, and that the extreme right-wing Movement of Zion types did shove some Palestinians off land that they had no claim on, but I also know that the majority of Palestinians "packed themselves into" the Palestinian controlled areas (actually larger than Israel was at the time) by their own choice. Your quote was Ben Gurion explaining why that happened - but frankly, just because the Palestinians felt that way doesn't make it true.


Unto paragraph number two, East Jerusalem is just as much Palestinian as it is Israeli and why should it be kept that way. Are Israel trying to be even more unreasonable than they already are?? Also you still haven't answered my query on Hebron why is it important for them to take the city over because Abraham lived there. Don't Muslims also believe their faith began from Abraham, and Christians too actually. To be fair who is to say the Wailing Wall is less important than the Dome of the Rock Mosque. Are you trying to say that Jewish places of worship are more important than Arab ones? Israelis respect Islam?? Please they killed 11 women outside a mosque in Beit Hanoun, some respect if you ask me. "Exterminating" talk about exaggeration to the extreme. That is what the Israelis are doing to the Palestinians by locking them out and cramping them into small spaces.


The avowed goal of the Yom Kippur war on the Arab side was to (and I quote) "Drive the Jews into the sea." (I think that was Nasser, but in all honesty I'm not certain.) Certainly sounds like extermination to me.

As to the relative importance of various pieces of architecture, that's purely subjective. To me, an Athiest, none of it has meaning, save as archaeology or for sheer beauty. To an Orthodox Jew, the Wailing Wall could be considered the most important place on earth; at the same time, to many in Islam the Dome of the Rock is the second most holy place in the world.

But the Palestinians lost any reasonable claim to East Jerusalem when they violated the agreements that divided the city, and specified that it be a non-military zone. Israel can quite reasonably say "Well, if we give it back they'll just do it all again. No thanks."



To be honest I just think Israelis use religion as an excuse to pursue their Zionist goals. The way they are treating the Palestinians goes against probably the entirety of the prophecy of Isaiah and probably a lot more. Zionism even goes against the Torah and the Tenakah. Please look on www.jewsagainstzionism.com for more.

All religion is just an excuse to grab power and influence. To be perfectly honest, the Israelis have been much more understanding and merciful than I would have been - had I been on the receiving end of all the bombs, rockets, mortars and assorted other crap the Palestinians have been throwing at them for fifty years, I'd've probably just expelled the lot of them from the entire region. Let Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and Egypt deal with the mess.