• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Congratulations, Hizballah...

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

fallout man

Golden Member
Nov 20, 2007
1,787
0
0
Come on, IHV...

How long can it take to get the copypasta together? Is there a hold-up because you had to consult your superiors and they're in a different time-zone?
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,531
3
0
Wow, persuasive. again, I'm not disputing a large segment of the right are "fundie Christians" but they are nothing compared to the fundi leftists who apologize for Iran, Syria, homicidal Palestinians.

Fundi Christians aren't blowing up their children or calling for the destruction of the Muslim world.
The settlement issue is an entirely different discussion. The reality is the Palestinians wouldn't even negotiate until Israel started re-building cities/villages that were destroyed or run over by the Arab forces in 1948.

From my experience talking with Israeli Jews, most reject the concept of "occupation" because it normally refers to conquest and occupation of a sovereign country which is not the case here. The "West Bank" was never sovereign.


Article 49 of the G.C was written after the Nazis forcibly transported millions of people (Jews, Poles, etc..) for the purpose of exterminating them, slave labor, etc. Article 49 revolved around preventing another sovereign Nazi-like state from eliminating their territory of Jews and making it "judenrein."


HILARIOUSLY, the Palestinians and Arabist cite Article 49 to enforce the racist exclusion that Article 49 was designed to prevent.

The Palestinians demand a right for any Palestinian Arab to live in a Jewish state, but want to exclude Jews from the right to live in a new Palestine state. They want a Palestine that is "judenrein."

The UN and their corrupt international courts have dubiously legitimized these Nazi Arabist claims.


http://www.davidknoll.com.au/files/JCOM/The Review - Courting Trouble.htm

http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=79269562

Ahhh, not surprising - the godfather of the Palestinian "question" al-Husayni was best friends with Hitler.

Man you are one spun individual. You seriously believe that Hitler didn't think that those who weren't of the so called Aryan race weren't inferior? Did he not also exterminate Gypsies who happen to be for the most part Muslims?

Regarding the Settlements, why is it so important to create them? All it does is make a tough situation worse, it's just stoking the fire.
 

Noobtastic

Banned
Jul 9, 2005
3,721
0
0
Man you are one spun individual. You seriously believe that Hitler didn't think that those who weren't of the so called Aryan race weren't inferior? Did he not also exterminate Gypsies who happen to be for the most part Muslims?
The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Hitler and the general Nazi partner had a certain administration for the mufti, which is why he was expelled (temporarily) by the British.

Supposedly, a Nazi-trained Arab SS forces exterminated most of the Jews in Yugoslavia.

Baathism was inspired by Nazism.



Regarding the Settlements, why is it so important to create them? All it does is make a tough situation worse, it's just stoking the fire.
Why is it so offensive? Jews living the desert? Israel's very presence is "stoking the fire." The very idea of a country run by Jews is enough to justify homicide.

I don't think you realize how intolerant the Arab world is. After all...look what they did to their Jews:

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

The real question is why does it bother so many people. The world has done enough denying Jewish rights and expelling them from every continent. Why can't they just be left alone for once.

look at the history:

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

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,531
3
0
The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Hitler and the general Nazi partner had a certain administration for the mufti, which is why he was expelled (temporarily) by the British.

Supposedly, a Nazi-trained Arab SS forces exterminated most of the Jews in Yugoslavia.

Baathism was inspired by Nazism.





Why is it so offensive? Jews living the desert? Israel's very presence is "stoking the fire." The very idea of a country run by Jews is enough to justify homicide.

I don't think you realize how intolerant the Arab world is. After all...look what they did to their Jews:

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

The real question is why does it bother so many people. The world has done enough denying Jewish rights and expelling them from every continent. Why can't they just be left alone for once.

look at the history:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_refugees
 
May 11, 2008
18,309
829
126
Name me a war where civilians aren't killed.

There is a difference between inadvertently killing non-combatants, and advocating genocide.

Hezbollah would murder every Jew in Israel if they had to means to do it.

We know this because they say it every hour.
Where to begin :
I once saw a cnn news bulletin where an old (grandma style)woman and a man where raging that they wanted the israeli people punished and dead. The news did not show why this was happening.
Later in life i saw a documentary made by a dutch journalist called Max Westerman (using raw video material of his own and from other news agencies. One of these pieces of video material was with that same people in it. In the complete unedited version, it could be seen that the man lost his wife and children because of a rocket attack from Israel. The old woman was related to the man. Because the old woman does not speak english her limited english vocabulary was limited to something like "kill all israeli !" in an emotional outburst. As an outsider, these people seem to want to only kill israeli people, but when the complete picture arises, it shows a whole different story. People who lost their family and are emotionally raged and saddened. Afcourse for the camera you do not cry, you show fighting spirit...
Besides, for as far as i can tell, israel is not such a free country even for jews. Because if you go against the political establishment you just might end up dead after being tortured or buried away deep in some prison. Does anybody remember some history about nazi Germany ?

People like you i believe can and want to live with a desire to kill someone all day. But most people just want peace and to sleep for once with out stress and sorrow and heal their torn apart hearts . This older woman is no different from any other grandma in the west, with the exception she had to suffer a lot more and had to bury her own offspring instead of her offspring burying her. And her offspring burying her ,that is the way it is supposed to be. When you hurt sane and normal people, they start to dislike you. It is the simple truth. And i can fully understand that some of the old jews in Israel have experienced death camps and that they will rather die and fight then to experience that again. And that is where the issue lies. The fear and hate on both sides of the fence causes people to behave irrationally. Both Palestinians and Israeli people. And the people on both sides of the fence who want to live in peace with each other are the victims.

You are blinded with hate and your propaganda shows it. I know jewish and arab people and i would help them when ever they ask as they would do for me, because i know that they rather live in peace with each other and me then fight for something stupid as religious motives based on outdated fantasies. They actually prefer to use their mind and i am glad to know them.


To stir it up a little more :

What is aipac for those that do not know outside of the USA :

Here is a dutch documentary (english subtitles):
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2894821400057137878#

And here is the website :
http://www.aipac.org/

An english documentary about Israels nuclear program :
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3026303226440094265#
 
Last edited:

Murloc

Diamond Member
Jun 24, 2008
5,376
64
91
For acquiring advanced ballistic capabilities courtesy of Syria, Iran and the rest of the peace gang of the Middle East:

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3876228,00.html

Lets have a debate here: What kind of conditions need to materialize for Israel to be justified preemptively striking Hizballah? ICBMs? Nukes? Never?
never.
If an enemy country is armed, it doesn't mean there has to be war.
Otherwise the US would have attacked NK.
They got nuclear warheads, they are enemy.
Same for hezbollah, but they just have short range missiles.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
2
0
never.
If an enemy country is armed, it doesn't mean there has to be war.
Otherwise the US would have attacked NK.
They got nuclear warheads, they are enemy.
Same for hezbollah, but they just have short range missiles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

During the heights of the cold war, and when we talk about large enemy countries that have nuclear weapons, few in the USA were even crazy enough to advocate attacking Russia. And to advocate an attack, required a first strike capacity and a missile defense system that was beyond the technology of the time. This the the mutually assured destruction doctrine that has kept large nations rational.

But maybe we should mention North Korea and former North Vietnam somewhat typical special case countries as being under the protection of a super power, and China China in this case. And as the USA tried to conquer North Korea and put boots on the ground in the North, China threw in their huge army, and the Korean war dragged to a stalemate. Later in the Vietnamese war, the operating rules became, the USA could conventionally bomb North Vietnam, but if the US put a boot on the ground in North Vietnam, China would come in to prevent any ground invasion.

The problem comes in certain parts of the world where there are few or no superpower protections. And Israel as the strongest is basically free to take out any small man and whup em, without fear of reprisal. And that type situation often invites the biggest to behave like a bully, and if there was a real balance or a fair fight, most bullies behave better.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
30,090
3,628
126
The problem comes in certain parts of the world where there are few or no superpower protections. And Israel as the strongest is basically free to take out any small man and whup em, without fear of reprisal. And that type situation often invites the biggest to behave like a bully, and if there was a real balance or a fair fight, most bullies behave better.
So, Islamic terrorists are killing people and Lemon Law's solution is to arm them.

Treason does not aptly define this treachery. I'll admit that your aim of arming Islamic nations could work at staving off our response to being attacked, but when every little piss ant nation has nuclear weapons and must adhere to MAD, especially among terrorist factions who revel in suicide... you're begging for a nuclear war.
 

Elias824

Golden Member
Mar 13, 2007
1,100
0
0
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

During the heights of the cold war, and when we talk about large enemy countries that have nuclear weapons, few in the USA were even crazy enough to advocate attacking Russia. And to advocate an attack, required a first strike capacity and a missile defense system that was beyond the technology of the time. This the the mutually assured destruction doctrine that has kept large nations rational.

But maybe we should mention North Korea and former North Vietnam somewhat typical special case countries as being under the protection of a super power, and China China in this case. And as the USA tried to conquer North Korea and put boots on the ground in the North, China threw in their huge army, and the Korean war dragged to a stalemate. Later in the Vietnamese war, the operating rules became, the USA could conventionally bomb North Vietnam, but if the US put a boot on the ground in North Vietnam, China would come in to prevent any ground invasion.

The problem comes in certain parts of the world where there are few or no superpower protections. And Israel as the strongest is basically free to take out any small man and whup em, without fear of reprisal. And that type situation often invites the biggest to behave like a bully, and if there was a real balance or a fair fight, most bullies behave better.
Hezbollah v.s Israel is quite a bit different from any cold war situation, Hezbollah dosent have any nation, therefore its hard to actually have any type of war against them. They also dont need to protect or worry about civilians such as Russia/China would have to. They really are not inhibited in the same was as a sovereign nation would be.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
2
0
Jaskalas makes some valid and invalid statements with, " So, Islamic terrorists are killing people and Lemon Law's solution is to arm them.

Treason does not aptly define this treachery. I'll admit that your aim of arming Islamic nations could work at staving off our response to being attacked, but when every little piss ant nation has nuclear weapons and must adhere to MAD, especially among terrorist factions who revel in suicide... you're begging for a nuclear war. "

First we have to maybe define terrorism because one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. An in the pre-1948 British mandate of Palestine, when the British were
" the cops ", many of the future Israeli leaders of post 1948 Israel State had no compunctions about being the robbers who used terrorism against the British army.
So why should terrorism be necessarily a bad thing, if its good enough for Israel, wny should terrorism be bad for Palestinians?

The other point to make is that the Israel nation has come a long way baby since them,
now they have heavy guns, tank, State of the arts planes, and almost certainly nuclear weapons. And the Palestinians have nothing to match that, and are left with rocks, bottles, suicide bombers, and now a limited number of short range rockets with no real guidance systems. And as Rummy said, you fight with what you have, not with the army you wish you had. Meanwhile, at least inside of the original 1948 borders, Israel has morally advanced to being partly cops and partly robbers. Outside of the 1967&73 borders of Israel, Israel has the moral position of being mainly robbers who outgun the cops, trying to get their stolen land back.

But Israel can and never will be in the enviable position of a large country like say Russia,
who twice in their history has been faced being conquered by the superior armed forces of Napoleon and Nazi Germany. As Russia can endlessly retreat and fight a battle of attrition, while the superior army sees their supply lines endlessly extend to beyond the breaking point. And as the supply lines snapped for Napoleon and Germany, Russia was able to regroup, counter attack, and very few French and German troops were able to make it back home alive.

And instead, Israel is in the exact opposite position, no buffer zone at all, as their vital organs are all at the surface. And as a worse case scenario would be for Israel to be hit
with weapons, already within potential terrorist grasp, namely chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapons. And if the terrorists Israel faces can find the means of delivery, the past Israeli theft of land plus continual Israeli disproportionate use of force, leaves the terrorists more than willing and long past angry enough to cheerfully make the Land of Israel humanly uninhabitable for anyone.

So given grim Israeli realities and the inevitable progress of technology that will find its way to terrorist hands, makes the #1 Israeli danger and threat in Israel's building up of hatreds for itself. Israeli military might improperly restrained may inspire fear but it never inspires love or acceptance. And also inspires a long term desire to remove the threat.

And Israel faces basically three types of terrorist threats. (1) One from the legitimate Arab States who have decent sized Standing armies, no one or two of which could stand up to Israel in a conventional war. But the two jokers in the legitimate States class may be in Turkey and Iran because Turkish military might is substantial but they are growing disenchanted with Israel. Iran now possesses a home grown defense industry able to produce anti-vehicular weapons that are portable and shoulder fired. And so rumor has already possess large stocks of chemical weapons and the means to
deliver them. Thus far Iran has shown great restraint in not making them readily available, but could totally make the US military occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq instantly untenable, and greatly aid the armed forces of surrounding Arab States in any efforts to over run Israel. The other thing Israel has shown is better military organization
that has doomed previous Arab attacks, as Arab organization proved abysmal. The down side is that the Arab States have an almost infinite potential to improve and better co-ordinate, and Israel, being already at 100%, has no such improvement potential. But still, at the present time, the Arab legitimate State threat is largely neutralized by Israel.

(2) The second class of terrorist are the semi State terrorists, not really legitimate States, but still tied to a particular region. Hamas, Fatah, and Hezbollah are certainly in that class, and at present, Israel, at the expense of building hatred has been successful in scaring the hell out of them and reducing attacks. But still, those semi-stare terrorists
are in no danger of losing support, because they all have social wings dedicated to the welfare of their people. But as Israel makes no concessions and gives back no stolen land, that group too bides their time.

(3) The third and perhaps most dangerous are the totally stateless terrorists whose hate of Israel may be infinite. And their funding and technology is growing. Unlike a semi-state terrorists, they don't give a damn how many people Israeli kills and it advances their ends to tempt Israel to attack Arab States and slaughter large groups
of people. If they can trespass on Jordanian land, Lebanese land, or Egyptian land, peg some missiles and sneak out, and cause Israel to attack friendly neighbors, it will give the surrounding Arab States little choice other than to all go on a war footing. And as it is, Israel lost a tremendous amount of international support for their rape of Lebanon and Gaza.

As I have said in this and other posts, is that Israel needs a way to ramp down mid-east tensions and not increase them. Thus far Israel stupidly increases those tensions to avoid making any land for peace deal. Thus far its worked for Israel for 62 years, but its very hard to envision it working all that much longer.

And somewhat like Dickens ghost of Christmas past, I am simply saying where no Israeli changes is very likely to get Israel.

Many pro-Israeli fan clubbers may want Israel to win as a simple gut choice, and I understand that, but the odds of that happening in the fullness of time, is not that high
without many Israeli peace process concessions far higher in price than the deal Arafat declined.

To say that I have every move by move accurately predicted is wrong, but I think I have at least one or more of the general likely progression correct if Israel stays on the present course.

And no, I do not want to see a general bloodbath or nuclear war, I support the Israeli right to exist, but its going to have to be a different Israel that is shared instead of pigged by just one group.
 

Noobtastic

Banned
Jul 9, 2005
3,721
0
0
First we have to maybe define terrorism because one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. An in the pre-1948 British mandate of Palestine, when the British were
" the cops ", many of the future Israeli leaders of post 1948 Israel State had no compunctions about being the robbers who used terrorism against the British army.
So why should terrorism be necessarily a bad thing, if its good enough for Israel, wny should terrorism be bad for Palestinians?
Why are you such an idiot?

Etzel developed AFTER the White Papers and Arab appeasement. The British conquered the Ottomans and promised the Jews and Arabs a state. British succumbed to extreme Arab violence (5,000 killed in the revolts), criminalized Jewish immigration to Palestine (at the time Palestine was the only entity that Jews could legally emigrate to) and Jews who were caught emigrating were sent to Nazi POW camps in Cyprus (over 20,000 captured).

Then, they let the Jews fend for themselves in 1948. In fact, the British fought alongside the Arabs.

The Etzel was a reaction to British subjugation and denial of Jewish rights. It was not committed to Britain's destruction, it was not racist or genocidal.

Also, Etzel was hated and hunted by the bigger and much larger Jewish paramilitary groups.

The Irgun was green peace compared to the Arab groups and British military.

Remember when British soldiers murdered and killed 260 Jews when they placed a bomb at Ben-Yehuda street in 1948?

The British "general" in Palestine - Alan Gordon Cunningham, refused an investigation. He wrote off the British soldiers as "deserters."

But of course, when an Irgun militant not under the command of the leadership shoots 2 British soldiers, the British army hanged 25 Irgun troops without trial.

The Jews were defending themselves against an enemy that was complicit in the Holocaust. The Arabs were avid consumers of antisemitism and their leader was Hitler's buddy.

I really don't hold it against the Jews considering the Arabs and British would have sat by and watched the Jews of Palestine be crushed and murdered as promised by the Arab League.

Israel became a progressive and modern state even though it didn't get all the land it was promised, and the Arabs inherited 11 million square kilometers, including a land 4x the size of Israel they confiscated from their own Jewish population - and yet, they still live in a cesspool.

They still can't go a day without stoning their wives.

Maybe they spend too much time using Israel as a lightening rod and not enough time educating their children to not hate Jews and the West.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
2
0
Ah yes, the IHV version is always that Israel is the total good guys and everyone else are the total bad guys.

I will say and say it again, if we view all sides as the bad guys, we will have it better pegged. Two wrongs do not add up to a single right, nor does 2 million wrongs and 2 million wrongs add up to a single right.

But even if we buy the IHV contention that the side that has the least wrongs must and will win in the end, or even that that side is Israel, any historian understands that the IHV contention has little predictive value in describing what happened in past world history.
 

Noobtastic

Banned
Jul 9, 2005
3,721
0
0
lol @ ihv's ignorance! hahaha

man, that guy is clueless...
LOL!

Ah yes, the IHV version is always that Israel is the total good guys and everyone else are the total bad guys.
I never said that. I responded to your post EXPLICITLY and provided FACTS. Don't convert my post into an ultimate strawman and expect a serious response.

Reply with intellectual honesty, or fuck off.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
2
0
IHV says, "I never said that. I responded to your post EXPLICITLY and provided FACTS. Don't convert my post into an ultimate strawman and expect a serious response.

Reply with intellectual honesty, or fuck off."

And I still point out, you have to be a super pollyanna fool to think the present Israeli strategy can lead anywhere but to a total mid-east trainwreck, with resultant butchery of basically millions of innocent people on all sides, just to satisfy the delusions of a few stupid extremist pigs in a minority in power on all sides. Or for that matter your total one sided bias version of intellectual dishonesty is the whole truth.

Pardon me, that is not a mid-east dish I would want to eat nor should you, but that is the mid-east Dish Devils brew that is now being brewed. The sane say I do not want that devils brew, the insane say, its the breakfast of champions.
 
Last edited:

Noobtastic

Banned
Jul 9, 2005
3,721
0
0
IHV says, "I never said that. I responded to your post EXPLICITLY and provided FACTS. Don't convert my post into an ultimate strawman and expect a serious response.

Reply with intellectual honesty, or fuck off."

And I still point out, you have to be a super pollyanna fool to think the present Israeli strategy can lead anywhere but to a total mid-east trainwreck, with resultant butchery of basically millions of innocent people on all sides, just to satisfy the delusions of a few stupid extremist pigs in a minority in power on all sides. Or for that matter your total one sided bias version of intellectual dishonesty is the whole truth.

Pardon me, that is not a mid-east dish I would want to eat nor should you, but that is the mid-east Dish Devils brew that is now being brewed. The sane say I do not want that devils brew, the insane say, its the breakfast of champions.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
2
0
Get em clue, you or I have not proved Jack shit. Except the massive mid-east injustices exist on all sides.

IHV, if you think Israel is the only total good guy without sin, you are simply off in some la la land that is beyond the realm of any human reasoning. So please feel free to delude only yourself.
 
May 11, 2008
18,309
829
126
About the El-AL boeing that came down in Amsterdam Bijlmer...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Al_Flight_1862

Soon after the disaster it was announced that the El Al Boeing 747 had contained fruit, perfumes, and computer components. Dutch Minister Hanja Maij-Weggen asserted that she was certain that the plane contained no military cargo.

In September 1993, the media reported that the El Al Boeing contained dangerous cargo. Some portion of the cargo proved to be Israeli national defense materials. It was also reported that a third of the cargo had not been physically inspected and that the cargo listings had not been checked.

The survivors' health complaints following the crash increased the number of questions about the cargo.

In 1998 it was publicly revealed that 190 liters of dimethyl methylphosphonate, a CWC schedule 2 chemical which can be used for the synthesis of Sarin nerve gas, had been included in the cargo. Israel stated that the material was non-toxic, was to have been used to test filters that protect against chemical weapons, and that it had been clearly listed on the cargo manifest in accordance with international regulations. The Dutch foreign ministry confirmed that it had already known about the presence of chemicals on the plane. The shipment was from a U.S. chemical plant to the Israel Institute for Biological Research under a U.S. Department of Commerce license.
No country is fully innocent because of some individuals...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimethyl_methylphosphonate
 
Last edited:

SamurAchzar

Platinum Member
Feb 15, 2006
2,422
1
76
Get em clue, you or I have not proved Jack shit. Except the massive mid-east injustices exist on all sides.

IHV, if you think Israel is the only total good guy without sin, you are simply off in some la la land that is beyond the realm of any human reasoning. So please feel free to delude only yourself.
I really don't understand your position, you're spewing all sorts of apocalyptic prophecies about the future of the Middle East, but so far, Israel situation is only getting better. If during the 60's it was militarily superior to the surrounding countries, today there's absolutely no contest, both militarily and in terms of civilian progress. The Palestinian terrorism has been forcefully stopped, and Israel enjoys some sympathy from Egypt, S.A. and others that have to deal with Shiia Terrorism.

The disgusting thing about your stance is that you are acting like those who accuse rape victim of getting rape because they wore revealing clothes. You predict millions of dead in the Middle East, but it's obvious to all of us that Israel is not going to be the one starting the aggression.

Lets face reality: No one gives a fuck about the Palestinians. You can expect Muslims to appreciate a prospering, advanced country like Israel planted right in what they perceive as their territory. The Palestinians can crawl to a cave and die as far as they're concerned.
 

SamurAchzar

Platinum Member
Feb 15, 2006
2,422
1
76
never.
If an enemy country is armed, it doesn't mean there has to be war.
Otherwise the US would have attacked NK.
They got nuclear warheads, they are enemy.
Same for hezbollah, but they just have short range missiles.
Everything is sound and fine, but Hizbullah is not a "country", it's a terrorist organization that's led by an extremist Shiia clerk.
Would any country tolerate the presence of such an organization on its border, armed with ballistic missiles? I think not.
 

Narmer

Diamond Member
Aug 27, 2006
5,293
0
0
Everything is sound and fine, but Hizbullah is not a "country", it's a terrorist organization that's led by an extremist Shiia clerk.
Would any country tolerate the presence of such an organization on its border, armed with ballistic missiles? I think not.
lol. It would help if Israel had a constructive presence in Lebanon. But Israel is too worried about short-term threats than long-term threats. I swear, you guys makes things worse than they really need to be. Not Israel in particular but Israel and her neighbors. It's like you're all in a race to the bottom. Even today, Israel has a cold peace with Egypt and Jordan. IMHO, since Israel has so much clout with Washington, they should push for democracy in these countries. Democracies are far easier to deal with and responsibility lies directly with the people. But, instead, Israel and her neighbors see things only for today. It was only last month when an Egyptian newspaper was praising Israel's mossad for slowing down Iran's nuclear program. An autocratic government's mouthpiece praising an unofficial enemy (while the general population is, at best, ambivalent about Iran's nukes and at worst, supportive). I also remember reading in the run-up to the war in Iraq how people in Washington and Jerusalem were saying that 'peace in the middle east goes through baghdad'.

Here's some simple truths: You cannot keep your adversaries down forever. Constructive engagements are far more fruitful than threats. If Israel really wants peace they should de-fang their neighbors with an olive branch rather than consistently labelling them. With Iranian nukes coming on stream in the next couple of years and Pakistan wobbling, Israel's nukes are not going to save her. Only peace will.
 

SamurAchzar

Platinum Member
Feb 15, 2006
2,422
1
76
I wish this was the state of things, but unfortunately, in the Muslim world (with the sole exception of Iran, possibly), its the people that are more radical than the governments, and its only getting worse with the rise of extremism.

In both Egypt and Jordan, if the power got back to the people, there is a very good chance the peace agreements with Israel would be thrown out the window.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
2
0
Even if Sammy is right with his statement, "In both Egypt and Jordan, if the power got back to the people, there is a very good chance the peace agreements with Israel would be thrown out the window" , its all the more reason for Israel to start defusing tension rather than increasing them.

If nothing else, Egypt is the more important country, and Mubarck, due to age, can not cling to power for much longer. The Sadie royal family grip on power may be far less stable than it appears, and the time may well be ripe for a New Nassar type leader to arise, with one of the unifying message being the universal Arab and mid-east hatreds for Israel. And much like Iran is Arab moderates of better sense, are unable to prevent that hard line sell, because they are discredited by Israel continually ramping up Israeli hatreds and tensions far higher, its not going to be good for Israel or anyone else.

I really really hope I am wrong in making those likely predictions, but that seems to be where the trend lines are heading, especially if Israel loses it blank check from Uncle Sam. An Uncle Sam who can no longer afford to arm Israel for free and now sees that arming Israel to the teeth has not lead to the desired mid-east peace.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY