If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Reuters)   Israel and Hamas declare truce. For those of you who aren't aware, "truce" is a term used in the region meaning "temporary cease-fire in order to restock weapons and ammunition"   (reuters.com) divider line 192
    More: Unlikely, Hamas, Gaza, Islamic Jihad, truces, ammunition, weapons  
•       •       •

2241 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Mar 2012 at 1:20 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



192 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-03-13 07:32:47 PM
FARK IT! LETS JUST GIVE FLORIDA TO THE JEWS AND BE DONE WITH THIS SHIAT!!

oh wait, that'd piss off the fundies pretty good. who would they get to spend all that time, money and blood to keep those nasty mooslims from building mosques all over the place until JC comes back?
 
2012-03-13 07:47:10 PM

StoneColdAtheist: LMark: Actually you just indicated that the Israelis had a motive to make a deliberate strike on a neutral country's ship. If the USA and Israel were allies, I would be more inclined to believe that it was an accident. I am growing more and more convinced that it was deliberate.

As a life-long Israel fanboi I am fully prepared to accept that Israel's attack on the USS Liberty was deliberate. In 1967 the ONLY ally Israel had was France. The US loaned Israel development money, yes, but was not giving them any significant military aid (if any at all). 1967 was barely 20 years after the end of WW2, and Israel was still largely getting along on hand-me-down equipment from the Western European WW2 Allies. Three times in the prior two decades Israel's vastly larger and stronger neighbors had massed their troops and armor on Israel's borders and threatened to push her into the sea and kill every last Jew in the country.

What do you expect? With an untrusted third-party spy ship off the coast, it is entirely conceivable that Israel took deliberate action against the Liberty. So be it. In the middle of an intense war for its very survival, Israel presumably would have done the same to a spy ship from any country in the same circumstances.

If it happened today I too would consider the attack a betrayal by an ally, but even if the attack was completely deliberate it was done under fundamentally different circumstances. We were NOT allies then, and that makes it different. So just get over it. The attack does not define US-Israeli cooperation nor impact our future relations. Fixating on it just reveals one to be a conspiracy nutcase or worse, and there are many more serious issues to contend with.


Biggest problem with that analysis is that if that were true then Israel wouldn't have stopped or paused in the attack.
 
2012-03-13 07:52:09 PM
img.photobucket.com
 
2012-03-13 07:57:46 PM
I'm just amazed that some people are actually making informed contributions to an Israel thread
 
2012-03-13 08:09:35 PM

The Morans Guy: I'm just amazed that some people are actually making informed contributions to an Israel thread


Amos hasn't gotten to it yet.
 
2012-03-13 08:16:22 PM

Diogenes The Cynic: The Morans Guy: I'm just amazed that some people are actually making informed contributions to an Israel thread

Amos hasn't gotten to it yet.


Amos has some informative contributions. It is informative of how a nazi supporter who won't admit it thinks.
 
Skr
2012-03-13 08:46:43 PM
Quick! Someone start airdropping Morrissey CD's.
 
2012-03-13 08:46:51 PM

dillopher: I think that the major reason for the truce this go round, is that Hamas has come out against Syria and its attacks on Syrian citizenry. As Syria is the major backer of Hamas, I doubt Hamas now has the ability to care on sustained conflict without Syrian support.


There's also the little detail that Israel has managed to tag a bunch of commanders in the recent fighting. That usually results in a temporary cease fire while the terrorists reorganize.

rudemix: I'm sure we'll be hearing that through no fault of Israel's they had to drive tanks over children soon enough. It's strange to grow up because at some point a light bulb goes off and one thinks 'Could one person or group of people be soley responsible for everything that happens over there 100 percent of the time?' and the answer, for me, is no. Then the other light bulb goes off and the question becomes 'Can people be so ignorant that they'll willingly believe everything told to them about how it is always the one person or group of people's fault every single time always?' and the answer to that is yes.


Where do you have any evidence of Israel driving tanks over children? Note that the recent pictures of Israel supposedly driving trucks over people were staged.

As for one side being responsible--it's easy. It only takes one side to make war.

Lehk: OnlyM3: // in before leftist blame the jooooozzz for islam being violent and dishonest.


typically the Israilis kill more Palestinian CHILDREN than Palestinians kill total


1) Showing which side is more effective says nothing about which side caused it.

2) Look more carefully at that "children" category--you'll find most of those "children" were 16 or 17 and combatants.

xcv: There was no occupation before 1967, did the Arabs leave the Jews alone in peace?


It's not proper to introduce such inconvenient facts.

Wolf_Cub: On the Israeli side, it is often a response that is disproportionate to the Palestinian side that is the problem. But those responses are deemed necessary by the Israeli government to not appear weak to an opponent that is looking for weakness.

Again your questions are interesting, but not truly equivalent.


Yeah, it's very disproportionate--631 rockets were fired towards Israel. I don't see anything like 631 bits of heavy ordinance headed the other way. A proportionate response would be a lot more Israeli shooting.

Lehk:
[i.imgur.com image 550x500]
the only similarity between the two is they both are boats


There's a lot of similarity there. Ignore the size--that's something that's *VERY* hard to determine from the air. Look at the locations of things sticking up, that's the sort of thing the pilots would see.

indylaw: Tatsuma:
Yeah and that is why in the last year they have opened multiple 4 and 5 stars hotels and restaurants and giant malls and water parks. It's Darfur times Mao

I'm sorry. Only 80% of the population relies on humanitarian food aid and 50% are unemployed, with failing water and electrical infrastructure. I take it back. It's practically Palm Beach.


That's not a rebuttal. There's luxury stuff for the Hamas elite, there's unemployment and starvation for the rest of the population. That's the only way Hamas can get recruits.

The problem with the electrical "infrastructure" is that Hamas won't buy fuel from Israel. It looks like the real issue is that they can tax fuel that comes in through the tunnels but they can't tax the fuel that comes in from Israel. Add in the fact that Egypt got tired of losing fuel cylinders (they were getting shortages) and cracked down.
 
2012-03-13 08:52:46 PM

liam76: Biggest problem with that analysis is that if that were true then Israel wouldn't have stopped or paused in the attack.


I'm going to go ahead and presume that you are not one of the nutcases I referred to, and that your comment is sincere. I'm also going to presume that you've never been in combat. My own combat experience is limited to a couple of mortarings and flying near the FEBA during both Gulf Wars, but even my modest experience gives me a clue as to what the pace of events must have been like on June 8th, 1967.

On that day Israel was 3 days into the Six Day War, which means that most Israeli troops and commanders had been on duty for 70-100 hours with little or no sleep. They were in uncharted waters in terms of ops tempo and their commanders were nearly overwhelmed with information from multiple fronts. Then along comes this asymmetric and unknown threat, the Liberty.

I can just imagine the calls going up and down the chain of command as to what to do about her. Finally, someone...somewhere in the IDF chain of command...orders the attack. Then officers on-scene question what they're doing, and conflicting orders come back...sink the ship...no, back off. Confusion reigns, but in the end Israel does not press the attack to a sinking.

Sounds weird, doesn't it? You might even ask yourself how an otherwise competent military could fall into such disarray. Fatigue, for one thing. Information overload for another. And keep in mind that Israel's reputation for being "superman" didn't emerge until after the Six Day War. Until then they were just another tiny military with a reputation for getting lucky against larger and stronger foes.

But overestimating the IDF would be a mistake. Back in Gulf War One there is a famous episode about when a combined arms unit of US Army tanks, APCs and attack helicopters engaged the Republican Guard. The helos were backing-up the grunts on the ground when their battalion commander in his chopper engaged one of his own APCs with missiles thinking it was Iraqi. It all comes down to the fog of war. He was tired, and even questions on the cockpit voice recorder if he has the right target. The grunts on the ground were out of position and out of commo. Nevertheless, even though he's right there on top of the action and the best man to assess the situation he pulls the trigger and kills men in his own unit.

Events so devastated the man that when he returned to the States he resigned his commission and left the Army, a promising officer's career snuffed out by his own remorse and guilt. I'm not saying that this happened over the Liberty, but merely point out how easy it is to make mistakes. To get priorities crossed up, and for situations to go sideways.
 
2012-03-13 09:16:58 PM

Marine1: Both sides have problems. We can't solve them if there's bullets flying.


We can if there's enough of them to kill everyone on both sides.

I didn't say it was a GOOD solution.

Then again, if they want to Darwin one another over whose Invisible Sky Wizard has the bigger dick, the gene pool can use some cleaning.
 
2012-03-13 09:20:37 PM

StoneColdAtheist: So yes, continuing to drag up the USS Liberty attack as evidence of treachery on Israel's part against "an ally" is either ignorant or anti-Semitic.


THIS.

It's about as relevant as still being pissed over the Brits burning DC in 1814. Alliances shift over time.
 
2012-03-13 09:26:44 PM
tfwiki.net

"When Predacons talk 'truce', it just means they need time to reload their weapons."

upload.wikimedia.org

"Under normal circumstances, yes."
 
2012-03-13 09:34:02 PM
StoneColdAtheist
As a life-long Israel fanboi I am fully prepared to accept that Israel's attack on the USS Liberty was deliberate. In 1967 the ONLY ally Israel had was France. The US loaned Israel development money, yes, but was not giving them any significant military aid (if any at all). 1967 was barely 20 years after the end of WW2, and Israel was still largely getting along on hand-me-down equipment from the Western European WW2 Allies. Three times in the prior two decades Israel's vastly larger and stronger neighbors had massed their troops and armor on Israel's borders and threatened to push her into the sea and kill every last Jew in the country.

What do you expect? With an untrusted third-party spy ship off the coast, it is entirely conceivable that Israel took deliberate action against the Liberty. So be it. In the middle of an intense war for its very survival, Israel presumably would have done the same to a spy ship from any country in the same circumstances.

If it happened today I too would consider the attack a betrayal by an ally, but even if the attack was completely deliberate it was done under fundamentally different circumstances. We were NOT allies then, and that makes it different. So just get over it. The attack does not define US-Israeli cooperation nor impact our future relations. Fixating on it just reveals one to be a conspiracy nutcase or worse, and there are many more serious issues to contend with.


Sorry. We may not have been allies, but we were not enemies, either. Hitting a ship flying the flag of one of the two superpowers was an act of monumental stupidity. And lying about it afterwards, after the confusion of battle ended, claiming they thought it was an Egyptian ship, was an act of monumental deceit, for which there is no excuse. Yes, people were tired, yes, there was the confusion of battle. But the Stars and Stripes are unmistakeable. And it's not like the ship took one hit and went down. It was the target of a barrage of hits. I can't come up with a conspiracy theory for why it happened, all I know is that it did. I don't know how much effect it should have on US-Israel relations, but I think that it should be remembered. I also think that Israel does not fully deserve the trust we place in it, because of that incident and their general behavior since.
 
2012-03-13 09:34:42 PM

liam76: Diogenes The Cynic: The Morans Guy: I'm just amazed that some people are actually making informed contributions to an Israel thread

Amos hasn't gotten to it yet.

Amos has some informative contributions. It is informative of how a nazi supporter who won't admit it thinks.



You are such a Jew.
 
2012-03-13 09:39:16 PM
StoneColdAtheist Back in Gulf War One there is a famous episode about when a combined arms unit of US Army tanks, APCs and attack helicopters engaged the Republican Guard. The helos were backing-up the grunts on the ground when their battalion commander in his chopper engaged one of his own APCs with missiles thinking it was Iraqi. It all comes down to the fog of war. He was tired, and even questions on the cockpit voice recorder if he has the right target. The grunts on the ground were out of position and out of commo. Nevertheless, even though he's right there on top of the action and the best man to assess the situation he pulls the trigger and kills men in his own unit.

Friendly fire is always a problem. But that was a split second incident. The attack on the Liberty lasted much longer than that.
 
2012-03-13 10:27:04 PM

LMark: Sorry. We may not have been allies, but we were not enemies, either. Hitting a ship flying the flag of one of the two superpowers was an act of monumental stupidity. And lying about it afterwards, after the confusion of battle ended, claiming they thought it was an Egyptian ship, was an act of monumental deceit, for which there is no excuse.


I agree. After all, it's not like other nations never lie about what happened...

www.internetweekly.org

LMark: Friendly fire is always a problem. But that was a split second incident. The attack on the Liberty lasted much longer than that.


So what? It's still an example of how events can get away from even the best of organizations. You yourself wrote, "I can't come up with a conspiracy theory for why it happened, all I know is that it did." I'm just saying there doesn't have to be a conspiracy theory. It happened. That's all.
 
2012-03-13 11:06:00 PM
The conflict between the two is summed up well in the first paragraph:

(Reuters) - An Egyptian-brokered truce between Israel and militant groups in the Gaza Strip began to take hold on Tuesday after four days of violence in which 25 Palestinians were killed and 200 rockets were fired at Israel.

Of course the article goes on to say none of those 200 (unconfirmed) rockets resulted in deaths. So its still 25 dead Palestinians to 0 dead Israelis. But woe to Israel is reported and expected from the readership.

And then the supporters of Israel in the violence will shout "how is Israel expected to tolerate these attacks?"

Its a one sided affair -in reporting, and in escalation. I have yet to read a report where the casualties do not favor Israel -yet we are to believe they are the victims in this mutual violence.
 
2012-03-13 11:10:49 PM

Lehk: OnlyM3: // in before leftist blame the jooooozzz for islam being violent and dishonest.

Israeli attack
[i.imgur.com image 640x433]

Palestinian Attack
[i.imgur.com image 408x271]

[i.imgur.com image 416x330]

typically the Israilis kill more Palestinian CHILDREN than Palestinians kill total


i486.photobucket.com
Just sayin'.

/Also, here's one you've all heard before:
Pop quiz: Mexico or Canada gets replaced by one of two countries and you get to decide. The countries are either Israel or "Palestine." Who would you rather live next to?
 
2012-03-13 11:16:50 PM

Frederick: The conflict between the two is summed up well in the first paragraph:

(Reuters) - An Egyptian-brokered truce between Israel and militant groups in the Gaza Strip began to take hold on Tuesday after four days of violence in which 25 Palestinians were killed and 200 rockets were fired at Israel.

Of course the article goes on to say none of those 200 (unconfirmed) rockets resulted in deaths. So its still 25 dead Palestinians to 0 dead Israelis. But woe to Israel is reported and expected from the readership.

And then the supporters of Israel in the violence will shout "how is Israel expected to tolerate these attacks?"

Its a one sided affair -in reporting, and in escalation. I have yet to read a report where the casualties do not favor Israel -yet we are to believe they are the victims in this mutual violence.


So, its cool for me to shoot at you as long as you don't get killed?

What is the escalation here? Israel gets rocket attacks, and according to you they're supposed to do-nothing?

Thats a farking retarded policy that will just get more rockets to be shot at them. Israel attacked only AFTER rockets were fired, so the provocation, and ensuing "escalation" is not an Israeli fault.
 
2012-03-13 11:24:39 PM

Diogenes The Cynic: Frederick: The conflict between the two is summed up well in the first paragraph:

(Reuters) - An Egyptian-brokered truce between Israel and militant groups in the Gaza Strip began to take hold on Tuesday after four days of violence in which 25 Palestinians were killed and 200 rockets were fired at Israel.

Of course the article goes on to say none of those 200 (unconfirmed) rockets resulted in deaths. So its still 25 dead Palestinians to 0 dead Israelis. But woe to Israel is reported and expected from the readership.

And then the supporters of Israel in the violence will shout "how is Israel expected to tolerate these attacks?"

Its a one sided affair -in reporting, and in escalation. I have yet to read a report where the casualties do not favor Israel -yet we are to believe they are the victims in this mutual violence.

So, its cool for me to shoot at you as long as you don't get killed?

What is the escalation here? Israel gets rocket attacks, and according to you they're supposed to do-nothing?

Thats a farking retarded policy that will just get more rockets to be shot at them. Israel attacked only AFTER rockets were fired, so the provocation, and ensuing "escalation" is not an Israeli fault.


I didnt say any of those things you attribute to me.

First show the world the proof of those 200 rocket attacks.
 
2012-03-14 12:26:57 AM

Frederick: Diogenes The Cynic: Frederick: The conflict between the two is summed up well in the first paragraph:

(Reuters) - An Egyptian-brokered truce between Israel and militant groups in the Gaza Strip began to take hold on Tuesday after four days of violence in which 25 Palestinians were killed and 200 rockets were fired at Israel.

Of course the article goes on to say none of those 200 (unconfirmed) rockets resulted in deaths. So its still 25 dead Palestinians to 0 dead Israelis. But woe to Israel is reported and expected from the readership.

And then the supporters of Israel in the violence will shout "how is Israel expected to tolerate these attacks?"

Its a one sided affair -in reporting, and in escalation. I have yet to read a report where the casualties do not favor Israel -yet we are to believe they are the victims in this mutual violence.

So, its cool for me to shoot at you as long as you don't get killed?

What is the escalation here? Israel gets rocket attacks, and according to you they're supposed to do-nothing?

Thats a farking retarded policy that will just get more rockets to be shot at them. Israel attacked only AFTER rockets were fired, so the provocation, and ensuing "escalation" is not an Israeli fault.

I didnt say any of those things you attribute to me.

First show the world the proof of those 200 rocket attacks.


So, there are air raid sirens, and people running into bunkers for no reason?

Here is a video of Iron Dome working:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikSYObmKT1c
 
2012-03-14 01:11:30 AM

Diogenes The Cynic: Frederick: Diogenes The Cynic: Frederick: The conflict between the two is summed up well in the first paragraph:

(Reuters) - An Egyptian-brokered truce between Israel and militant groups in the Gaza Strip began to take hold on Tuesday after four days of violence in which 25 Palestinians were killed and 200 rockets were fired at Israel.

Of course the article goes on to say none of those 200 (unconfirmed) rockets resulted in deaths. So its still 25 dead Palestinians to 0 dead Israelis. But woe to Israel is reported and expected from the readership.

And then the supporters of Israel in the violence will shout "how is Israel expected to tolerate these attacks?"

Its a one sided affair -in reporting, and in escalation. I have yet to read a report where the casualties do not favor Israel -yet we are to believe they are the victims in this mutual violence.

So, its cool for me to shoot at you as long as you don't get killed?

What is the escalation here? Israel gets rocket attacks, and according to you they're supposed to do-nothing?

Thats a farking retarded policy that will just get more rockets to be shot at them. Israel attacked only AFTER rockets were fired, so the provocation, and ensuing "escalation" is not an Israeli fault.

I didnt say any of those things you attribute to me.

First show the world the proof of those 200 rocket attacks.

So, there are air raid sirens, and people running into bunkers for no reason?

Here is a video of Iron Dome working:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikSYObmKT1c


Could be. We have tornado drills all the time where I live. Is that the most substantial proof you can offer for killing Palestinians in "response"?

I dont believe a country can claim the moral high ground without substantial proof of an attack. And proof shouldnt be hard to ascertain. Do you think asking for proof is asking for too much?

btw -I was similarly skeptical of the US's military incursions. Any civilian should be -skepticism is our duty.
 
2012-03-14 01:33:24 AM

Frederick: Diogenes The Cynic: Frederick: Diogenes The Cynic: Frederick: The conflict between the two is summed up well in the first paragraph:

(Reuters) - An Egyptian-brokered truce between Israel and militant groups in the Gaza Strip began to take hold on Tuesday after four days of violence in which 25 Palestinians were killed and 200 rockets were fired at Israel.

Of course the article goes on to say none of those 200 (unconfirmed) rockets resulted in deaths. So its still 25 dead Palestinians to 0 dead Israelis. But woe to Israel is reported and expected from the readership.

And then the supporters of Israel in the violence will shout "how is Israel expected to tolerate these attacks?"

Its a one sided affair -in reporting, and in escalation. I have yet to read a report where the casualties do not favor Israel -yet we are to believe they are the victims in this mutual violence.

So, its cool for me to shoot at you as long as you don't get killed?

What is the escalation here? Israel gets rocket attacks, and according to you they're supposed to do-nothing?

Thats a farking retarded policy that will just get more rockets to be shot at them. Israel attacked only AFTER rockets were fired, so the provocation, and ensuing "escalation" is not an Israeli fault.

I didnt say any of those things you attribute to me.

First show the world the proof of those 200 rocket attacks.

So, there are air raid sirens, and people running into bunkers for no reason?

Here is a video of Iron Dome working:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikSYObmKT1c

Could be. We have tornado drills all the time where I live. Is that the most substantial proof you can offer for killing Palestinians in "response"?

I dont believe a country can claim the moral high ground without substantial proof of an attack. And proof shouldnt be hard to ascertain. Do you think asking for proof is asking for too much?

btw -I was similarly skeptical of the US's military incursions. Any civilian should be -skepticism is our duty.


So, you believe the Israelis would start shooting at someone, knowing that a response would put a million of its own citizens in the firing line, for no good reason?
 
2012-03-14 01:48:31 AM

LMark: Tatsuma Jews and Muslims do not worship the same deity. We worship G-d, they worship Allah. Not the same thing at all.


You worship a Germanic deity? (look up the etymology of the word "God") Allah is just the generic Arabic word for God, and it's frankly closer to the Hebrew word "Al" than it is to the English word.


There are three ways to view this conundrum:
1. Muslims worship the same god as jews simply because they claim its the same god, as that is all that is required of any religion.

2. We go back in history and find out they existed as separate gods from various moon-worshipping bullshiat.

3. Tatsuma plays the "my holy book is the only that is correct" card, and therefore everything he says is fact and everyone else is an idiot for not being ultra-orthodox. Which is clearly what he is playing. This of course means any land his book says belongs to jews clearly belongs to jews, and the rest of the world is evil to believe otherwise. Also, any religious zealotry on the part of jews (probably only those who agree with tatsuma though, as I"m guessing jews who are more extreme in their ultra-orthodoxy aren't true scotsmen, and those who aren't as extreme are just a bunch of sinners paying lip service) is therefore logical and valid, while any religious views of other religious is invalid.

But don't worry, its cool, because tatsuma claims not all the infidel muslims are bad, just anyone who is in charge of them, so none of them should be allowed positions of leadership I'm sure.

For my part, all religious whackos are the same, and the only difference between a Santorum and an Imam is how much they can get away with in their search for power. I have no doubt all the Tatsumas of every religious have 100% faith that they hold the one and true interpretation of all things godly, which just makes them that much scarier to me.
 
2012-03-14 02:16:55 AM

indylaw: "It was significantly better there before the Israeli embargo."


Chronologically, yes. But it had fark-all to do with the "Israeli embargo" and everything to do with what how they exercised their newly-found self determination after Israel's departure.


indylaw: "Look, Hamas are no saints, and Israel no devils, but the State of Israel has at least some culpability in deteriorating conditions for people in Gaza."


Do you really believe that? Hypothetically, let's say the Palestinians in Gaza got what they (and most of the posters in this thread) ostensibly want: every Jew in Israel has been eradicated, and the land is theirs for the taking. Let's even say for the sake of argument that Jordan, Lebanon and everyone else who made their life a living hell long before the "brutal occupation" stays away and doesn't make competing claims for the land. Are you under the impression that they'll suddenly end their infighting, distribute their wealth and get down to the business of nation-building? Previous experience shows otherwise.

There's no argument that Palestinians, particularly in Gaza, are miserable. But Israel isn't the reason why. As far as blaming the "embargo", it's a little bit like blaming parents for a child's frustration and boredom because they took away his chemistry set after he used it to build stink bombs. Yes, technically you could say that the parents have "at least some culpability" in what the child is going through, but it would be disingenuous at best to actually blame them for it.

In the West Bank, where Palestinians (though you'd never know it, given the media's single-minded obsession with settlements) are slowly becoming less miserable (or at least were, until they started taking cues from Hamas), nobody -- least of all, Israel -- is standing in their way. The universe helps those who help themselves.


indylaw: "And claiming, like MeinRS6 does, that Gaza is a resort, is dishonest."


It would be, and nobody is claiming that - least of all MeinRS6, who doesn't even appear in this thread. (Though to be fair, it isn't a complete falsehood, either.) What Tatsuma is claiming -- correctly -- is that what money Gaza does have is being grossly misappropriated and spent on wining, dining and lining the pockets of the few instead of feeding and employing the many. That doesn't mean the region is rich, but it does at least strongly imply that their poverty isn't somebody else's fault.


indylaw: "So which is it? Is Gaza a third-world shiathole as a result of its government's own corruption and malfeasance, or is it a lush seaside oasis with plenty of food and a luxurious standard of living? It can't be both."


It's the former, although -- as with most places in the world with that level of civilization -- for the razor-thin upper crust it's the latter. Recall that Yasser Arafat died with a personal net worth of about $1.3 billion, pilfered almost entirely from international aid destined for the people he was "leading" and from their own tax contributions.
 
2012-03-14 02:40:00 AM

The Morans Guy: I dont believe a country can claim the moral high ground without substantial proof of an attack. And proof shouldnt be hard to ascertain. Do you think asking for proof is asking for too much?

btw -I was similarly skeptical of the US's military incursions. Any civilian should be -skepticism is our duty.

So, you believe the Israelis would start shooting at someone, knowing that a response would put a million of its own citizens in the firing line, for no good reason?


I wouldnt even consider such a question as rational justification. I would accept photos of rocket shells with wide angle shots. I'd accept third party radar print screens. I'd accept U.N. witness accounts. All forms totaling approximately 200 rockets.

Do you understand that in the absence of evidence the world is essentially being asked to take the account on faith alone? I am equally skeptical of the Palestinians account -but I havent heard any Israeli sources dispute the 25 killed. And to be fair it's difficult here in the US to get an account of the conflict from Palestinian sources.
 
2012-03-14 02:49:14 AM

spmkk: Hypothetically, let's say the Palestinians in Gaza got what they (and most of the posters in this thread) ostensibly want: every Jew in Israel has been eradicated, and the land is theirs for the taking.


I will call BS on this statement. Most posters in this thread are not anti-Israel. I read far more pro-Israel comments than anti-Israel comments. I will concede the ratio is more anti-Israel than you would find in a FOX, ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, or YAHOO thread -but none-the-less, still decidedly pro-Israel.

It does not help the Israeli position to claim otherwise. To do so is disingenuous.
 
2012-03-14 06:31:00 AM
li

StoneColdAtheist: liam76: Biggest problem with that analysis is that if that were true then Israel wouldn't have stopped or paused in the attack.

I'm going to go ahead and presume that you are not one of the nutcases I referred to, and that your comment is sincere. I'm also going to presume that you've never been in combat. My own combat experience is limited to a couple of mortarings and flying near the FEBA during both Gulf Wars, but even my modest experience gives me a clue as to what the pace of events must have been like on June 8th, 1967.


i think you are missing my point. If it was a call by the Israeli govt to take otut hat ship knowing it was an american one, they wouldn't have stopped, they wouldn't have paused and the ship wouldn;t have made it out. There is no reasonable scenario I can think of, or that conspiracy theorists have put forward that would explain why Israel didn't sink the liberty.
 
2012-03-14 06:53:31 AM

DavidVincent: liam76: Diogenes The Cynic: The Morans Guy: I'm just amazed that some people are actually making informed contributions to an Israel thread

Amos hasn't gotten to it yet.

Amos has some informative contributions. It is informative of how a nazi supporter who won't admit it thinks.


You are such a Jew.


I was brought up a catholic, I am an athiest, but thanks for playing.

I wonder what that makes you to toss that around as if it were an insult.
 
2012-03-14 09:48:32 AM
Tatsuma: I would say that the vast vast vast majority of Muslims do not have such a death wish. Just the assholes in power with lots and lots of weapons.

I would like to think this is true of the asshole with power on both sides.
 
2012-03-14 11:17:26 AM

liam76: DavidVincent: liam76: Diogenes The Cynic: The Morans Guy: I'm just amazed that some people are actually making informed contributions to an Israel thread

Amos hasn't gotten to it yet.

Amos has some informative contributions. It is informative of how a nazi supporter who won't admit it thinks.


You are such a Jew.

I was brought up a catholic, I am an athiest, but thanks for playing.

I wonder what that makes you to toss that around as if it were an insult.



your liberal use of the word "Nazi".
I don't care if you are an athiest. what are your bloodlines?
 
2012-03-14 12:12:37 PM

spmkk: It would be, and nobody is claiming that - least of all MeinRS6, who doesn't even appear in this thread. (Though to be fair, it isn't a complete falsehood, either.) What Tatsuma is claiming


Oh, I'm sorry. Must be a simple misunderstanding.
 
2012-03-14 12:46:55 PM

JeffDudeLebowski: Tatsuma: I would say that the vast vast vast majority of Muslims do not have such a death wish. Just the assholes in power with lots and lots of weapons.

I would like to think this is true of the asshole with power on both sides.


Nah, jews worship the right god, so its cool.
 
2012-03-14 12:58:44 PM

DavidVincent: liam76: DavidVincent: liam76: Diogenes The Cynic: The Morans Guy: I'm just amazed that some people are actually making informed contributions to an Israel thread

Amos hasn't gotten to it yet.

Amos has some informative contributions. It is informative of how a nazi supporter who won't admit it thinks.


You are such a Jew.

I was brought up a catholic, I am an athiest, but thanks for playing.

I wonder what that makes you to toss that around as if it were an insult.


your liberal use of the word "Nazi".
I don't care if you are an athiest. what are your bloodlines?


Applying Nazi supporter to Amos isn't liberal usage.

Irish, and western european mut.

So you think jews is an insult, and aren't concerned with my religion, but my bloodlines, once again I wonder what that makes you.
 
2012-03-14 02:29:33 PM

give me doughnuts: Two questions for which I would like serious answers:

1) What would happen if the Palestinians got rid of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Fatah and stopped all their people from fighting?


That's impossible. There's no one person or group in charge of the PA, let alone Hamas, IJ, and Fatah. I'm not saying that the PA couldn't do more to stop the attacks, but these are paramilitary (and/or terrorists), not officially sanctioned. Whether the PA really wants these attacks to stop or not is an open question, but you would need some serious change in power structures before these groups can be effectively and completely stopped.

However, if this happened it's likely that international pressure on Israel would strongly shift toward normalization. Recognition won't happen until the major players (PA included) recognize Israel's right to exist. Membership in the UN is a non-issue; there are plenty of players who will pass meaningless resolutions attacking Israel. The only parts of the UN with executive teeth are the Security Committee and International Court of Justice (and that barely).

2) What would happen if Israel disbanded the IDF and stopped all their people from fighting?

Disbanded the whole military? Never going to happen. I can't recall a single country totally dismantling their military with the possible sorta-kinda exception of Japan, and even that wasn't permanent and it was caused by (and a condition of) Japan's surrender.

However, there are two theories: one is that no one would attack them, and the other is that everyone in the region (or some subset) would attack them. I don't know that nations would officially attack Israel, but I can guarantee that paramilitary organizations (probably with at least secret state sponsorship) would be killing people left and right.

On a related note, I think restraint is a good thing, and I'm tired of the region being involved in a conflict. I don't see any downside for either party to a truce, and hope that this has legs.
 
2012-03-14 02:34:54 PM

Lehk: ...
typically the Israilis kill more Palestinian CHILDREN than Palestinians kill total


When peace comes, we will perhaps in time be able to forgive the Arabs for killing our sons, but it will be harder for us to forgive them for having forced us to kill their sons. - Golda Meir
 
2012-03-14 04:48:34 PM
Blessed be the peacemakers.

For it is them who give the arms manufacturers time to catch up on their backlogs.
 
2012-03-14 05:39:11 PM

indylaw: Oh, I'm sorry. Must be a simple misunderstanding.


So is that just you being passive-aggressive, because I said you weren't actually Jewish, now you are pretending that I am someone I am not in order to give me some sort of payback?

That's pretty petty and childish, as I don't believe you're anywhere near stupid enough to actually believe I am mein.
 
2012-03-14 05:48:41 PM

Secret Polish Boyfriend: I'm not saying that the PA couldn't do more to stop the attacks,


You mean the same Fatah whose group proudly announced that they fired rockets during that last round?

The PA itself was involved.

Secret Polish Boyfriend: , not officially sanctioned.


So now Hamas is not a political party also part of the parliament?
 
2012-03-14 08:17:57 PM

liam76: StoneColdAtheist: I'm going to go ahead and presume that you are not one of the nutcases I referred to, and that your comment is sincere. I'm also going to presume that you've never been in combat. My own combat experience is limited to a couple of mortarings and flying near the FEBA during both Gulf Wars, but even my modest experience gives me a clue as to what the pace of events must have been like on June 8th, 1967.

i think you are missing my point. If it was a call by the Israeli govt to take otut hat ship knowing it was an american one, they wouldn't have stopped, they wouldn't have paused and the ship wouldn;t have made it out. There is no reasonable scenario I can think of, or that conspiracy theorists have put forward that would explain why Israel didn't sink the liberty.


I may be missing your point, but I still think you're wrong. To me is is entirely possible that someone would order the attack on the Liberty, and that someone else, higher up, would cancel that order when it came to their attention.

Anyway, thank you for the civil conversation on a topic about which we will never know the whole story.
 
2012-03-14 09:06:04 PM
Let the Middle East blow themselves to kingdom come. Their in-fighting has been going on for centuries and is completely religion-based, which means nothing is going to get them to make peace.

The only reason the US cares is because we get most of our oil from there. The faster we get alternate energy supplies going, the less we'll have to rely on the touchiness and whims of the Middle East and the sooner we can get out of there and stop trying to play policeman.
 
2012-03-15 10:16:58 PM

Tatsuma: indylaw: Oh, I'm sorry. Must be a simple misunderstanding.

So is that just you being passive-aggressive, because I said you weren't actually Jewish, now you are pretending that I am someone I am not in order to give me some sort of payback?

That's pretty petty and childish, as I don't believe you're anywhere near stupid enough to actually believe I am mein.


MeinRS6 responded to a post that was addressed toward you, and wrote in a similar manner. Perhaps it was a coincidence. Perhaps it was a joke on his part. But no one has ever heard of alts on this website.

For all I know you could be a bored 23-year-old basement dweller in Wichita with wicked asthma and a penchant for Sailor Moon cosplay. I have no idea.
 
Displayed 42 of 192 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report