Has Israel lost?

[Twerpzilla]

Amused, the armament of the arab nations are not the issue with Palistine. Nobody wants the Palistinians in there land, they get little support from the Arab world. Syria has no desire for a war with israel, they are doing just fine in a financial sense for a war to deplet there raping of the Syrian people. Lebanon is rebounding from there civil war and there occupation by the israelie terrorist. Jordan can not support a war. Egypt has bigger fish to fry.

Some land, not all, was owned by the jews. Much was also ownedby non-jews. Land that is leagally owned by jewish settlers has never been a issue. The land taken at gun point, that is illegally owned is the issue.

Arabs rushed into the area to help stop the terror of the 1948 freedom war.

As far as US aid, it was pretty significant. Dollar wise, I do not have the numbers at hand, so not any support of my point here, but support was significant.

Yes, the Palistinians were in southern Lebanon. Lebanon did not and does notwant them there. Still no excuse for the whole sale slaughterofinoocents. But then that is status qou for israel.

Red, as usuall, your un-inciteful, derogatory BS is hardlyworth a responseto. But if you insist on knowing, I amnota Arab. As a matter of fact my family has probably been inthe United States far longer then yours. Pre-revolutionary war eraby severaldecades. The Russians protected there oil supply inthe Middle East by giving countries arms. Greatened the USSR's spere of influance, kept the USA from getting influance withmanyofthe Arab countries. Not to complicated to figure out.

 

[Amused]

<< Amused, the armament of the arab nations are not the issue with Palistine. Nobody wants the Palistinians in there land, they get little support from the Arab world. Syria has no desire for a war with israel, they are doing just fine in a financial sense for a war to deplet there raping of the Syrian people. Lebanon is rebounding from there civil war and there occupation by the israelie terrorist. Jordan can not support a war. Egypt has bigger fish to fry. >>



Never mind that these very countries have collectively attacked Israel 4 times...

As for Lebanon, don't harbor terrorists if you don't want the terrorized country to strike back.



<< Some land, not all, was owned by the jews. Much was also ownedby non-jews. Land that is leagally owned by jewish settlers has never been a issue. The land taken at gun point, that is illegally owned is the issue.

Arabs rushed into the area to help stop the terror of the 1948 freedom war. >>



Freedom war? The land was devided 50/50 among Arabs and Jews. The Jews were fine with this, the Arabs were not, even though the Jews outnumbered the Arabs at the time. Freedom war? It was Arab aggression that brought the war of 48. This is a historical fact.



<< As far as US aid, it was pretty significant. Dollar wise, I do not have the numbers at hand, so not any support of my point here, but support was significant. >>



Just as with the rest of your "facts," this one is completely wrong. The Israelis were not funded by the US until after the 67 war.



<< Yes, the Palistinians were in southern Lebanon. Lebanon did not and does notwant them there. Still no excuse for the whole sale slaughterofinoocents. But then that is status qou for israel. >>



Don't attack someone stronger than you if you don't want to be killed.



<< Red, as usuall, your un-inciteful, derogatory BS is hardlyworth a responseto. But if you insist on knowing, I amnota Arab. As a matter of fact my family has probably been inthe United States far longer then yours. Pre-revolutionary war eraby severaldecades. The Russians protected there oil supply inthe Middle East by giving countries arms. Greatened the USSR's spere of influance, kept the USA from getting influance withmanyofthe Arab countries. Not to complicated to figure out. >>



Um, what happened to the "unorganized freedom fighters?" They were highly organized aggressors and supplied by the USSR, which you now admit. Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and Egypt attacked little nearly defenseless Israel alll at once in not one, not two, but three wars of aggression. Egypt was such a glutton for punishment that it continued three more times.

Sorry, Twerp, but your history is about as factual as a Weekly World Globe alien story.

 

[b0mbrman]

<< Israel has won every battle thrust upon it by Arab aggressors. However, they seem to be losing, or have already lost the propaganda war. >>


Yes they have...I must admit, it was very clever on their part...After losing 5 conventional wars, how could they know that their next strategy would work so well? How could they possibly know that the world would ignore suicide bombers?


<< Its a war that is impossible to win unless Israel pulls back from Palestinian land. >>


Oh lord...once upon a time in a land far, far away, the IDF pulled out as a show of goodwill. What did they get in return for it?

1 April: A car bomb explodes in West Jerusalem killing the bomber and critically injuring a policeman inspecting the vehicle.

31 March: Bomber attacks restaurant in Haifa, northern Israel, killing himself and 14 Israeli Jews and Arabs. On the same day, another bomber kills himself and wounds four people in an attack on an office for paramedics at the Jewish settlement of Efrat, south of Bethlehem.

30 March: A suicide attack on a Tel Aviv restaurant leaves the bomber dead and 30 Israelis wounded.

29 March: A woman bomber kills herself and two others at a Jerusalem supermarket.

27 March: In the Israeli resort of Netanya, a bomber blows himself up at a hotel, killing 28 Israelis celebrating Passover.

26 March: Three injured in car bomb blast near a shopping centre in Jerusalem.

from here

 

[bizmark]

<< Just as with the rest of your "facts," this one is completely wrong. The Israelis were not funded by the US until after the 67 war. >>



Now you're making up facts Amused. Pro-Israel site:



<< President Truman responded by approving a $135 million Export-Import Bank loan and the sale of surplus commodities to Israel. >>





<< In 1951, Congress voted to help Israel cope with the economic burdens imposed by the influx of Jewish refugees from the displaced persons camps in Europe and from the ghettos of the Arab countries. >>





<< U.S. economic grants to Israel ended in 1959. >>



Now, if this is what you meant, I can let it slide, but you need to be more specific in the future:



<< Israel began buying arms from the United States in 1962, but did not receive any grant military assistance until after the 1973 Yom Kippur War. >>



This table shows 6 military loans from the U.S. to Israel between 1959 and 1966, with the 1966 loan being 90 million dollars.

So if you want to claim that there were no military grants before 1973, you can, but you absolutely cannot claim that there was no U.S. "funding" for Israel before 1967.

 

[Random Variable]

You know the saying, "You can't fool all of the people all of the time?" Well, the PA has just about disproven that axiom.

 

[Random Variable]

And Israel has lost in terms of the propaganda war. But then again, they have never won a propaganda war.

 

[Red Dawn]

<< But if you insist on knowing, I amnota Arab. As a matter of fact my family has probably been inthe United States far longer then yours. Pre-revolutionary war eraby severaldecades. The Russians protected there oil supply inthe Middle East by giving countries arms. Greatened the USSR's spere of influance, kept the USA from getting influance withmanyofthe Arab countries. Not to complicated to figure out. >>

Unlike trying to read your post.

 

[Amused]

<< So if you want to claim that there were no military grants before 1973, you can, but you absolutely cannot claim that there was no U.S. "funding" for Israel before 1967. >>



My claim was "no signifigant" aid. 90 million in loans is NOTHING, not even in 1966 dollars, for funding a military. It is very insignifigant.

 

[bizmark]

<< My claim was "no signifigant" aid. 90 million in loans is NOTHING, not even in 1966 dollars, for funding a military. It is very insignifigant. >>





<< The US offered no signifigant aid to Israel until after the 1967 war. >>





<< << As far as US aid, it was pretty significant. Dollar wise, I do not have the numbers at hand, so not any support of my point here, but support was significant. >>

Just as with the rest of your "facts," this one is completely wrong. The Israelis were not funded by the US until after the 67 war. >>



Yes, your first claim was "no significant" (sp. w/ a c, not a g, BTW). But your second was "not funded by the US". The U.S. gave Israel a total of $1.2bil in loans and grants, for military and economic aid, between 1949 and 1966. I don't know, a billion dollars seems significant to me. Sure, most of it was not military aid, but then again, in your claims you have not distinguished between military and economic aid. You just said no significant aid. I don't want to debate what constitutes a significant amount of aid, but my point was that you made the sweeping statement that there was no aid, even when you were trying to debunk Twerpzilla's statement that there was significant aid.

 

[kgraeme]

<<
Don't attack someone stronger than you if you don't want to be killed.
>>



Might makes right?

 

[Zebo]

Geez were doing it again. taking sides that is. I guess it's impossible not to, but I think from purely strategic POV Israel has/is losing. The Muslims are going to recuit even higher numbers of suicide bombers as evidenced by female recruitment and they are going to have thier hands full for years to come. And they will be hesitant to move in again with the current political climate so this war could be considered a loss overall. My dad always said "if you start something you damn well better finish it." I don't think Israel had meet that standard.

 

[Turkey]

What have they lost? That would imply that they had something to lose. Have the lost security? No, they didn't have any before. Have they lost the propoganda war? No, the entire world but the US had a negative opinion about Israel before the offensive. The Israelis have nothing left to lose except the country. To use a really bad analogy, it was a natural reaction to the Palestinian escalation that led to this defense.

 

[Spike]

say guys -- want to join my religion? I had a dream last night, and God told me that he gave me and all followers of my religion the entire Pacific Northwest. One of the most beautiful areas in the world. It's obviously the Chosen Land. See, now all we've got to do is move there and build up enough of a presence. Then one day we'll whip out the guns and kill or kick out everybody else. Then we'll declare independence, and we'll be all set! God is on our side -- we can't lose! Whaddaya say?

<< Yeah that's like making Newark the Capital of the US. Another rerason to disbelieve Judeo/Chirstian nonsense as complete and utter bullsh!t. >>

ok wbwither and red dawn, you guys need to calm down. Red dawn, normally have at least semi-decent things to say, but this whole "lets crap on religion because some strage person is ticking me off" really makes you sound immature. You don't like religion, fine, but respect those in the community who are religous. Same with you wbwither, you need to back off as well. The mods will ban any topic relating to religion if they turn into crap fest like this, they did it on the hot deals forum for a while so they can do it here.

I am not saying mrPALCO is at all right. In fact, as a Christian myself I disagree with his methods and what he is saying, but that is beside the point. Lets just all stick to the topic at hand and not make these kind of remarks, ok?

 

[Balthazar]

<<

<< Its a war that is impossible to win unless Israel pulls back from Palestinian land. >>



Czar, Czar, Czar. You know better. The Israeli's have offered them everything, and were told to go fly a kite. Pulling back from so-called "Palestinian land" will do nothing. The sole reason for this whole war is the very existence of Israel. >>



Agreed.
Czar is about as good a source of information as you can get....nevermind the bias, the idiocy, and the general lack of common sense....

 

[bandXtrb]

<<
ok wbwither and red dawn, you guys need to calm down. Red dawn, normally have at least semi-decent things to say, but this whole "lets crap on religion because some strage person is ticking me off" really makes you sound immature. You don't like religion, fine, but respect those in the community who are religous. Same with you wbwither, you need to back off as well. The mods will ban any topic relating to religion if they turn into crap fest like this, they did it on the hot deals forum for a while so they can do it here.

I am not saying mrPALCO is at all right. In fact, as a Christian myself I disagree with his methods and what he is saying, but that is beside the point. Lets just all stick to the topic at hand and not make these kind of remarks, ok? >>


That statement does not appear so much as an insult as it does an explanation of the logic used by MrPALCO and other religious fanatics. It shows that these statements should not be given credibility because any crazy person like MrPALCO can make them up. Also, its entirely possible that folks could start fighting reliigous wars in the Pacific Northwest in a hundred years due to wbwither's dream.

 

[HamSupLo]

Has Israel lost?

yeah, the army has lots its morality

 

[Amused]

<<

<<
Don't attack someone stronger than you if you don't want to be killed.
>>



Might makes right? >>



No, stupidity makes dead.

 

[bizmark]

<< ok wbwither and red dawn, you guys need to calm down. Red dawn, normally have at least semi-decent things to say, but this whole "lets crap on religion because some strage person is ticking me off" really makes you sound immature. You don't like religion, fine, but respect those in the community who are religous. Same with you wbwither, you need to back off as well. The mods will ban any topic relating to religion if they turn into crap fest like this, they did it on the hot deals forum for a while so they can do it here.

I am not saying mrPALCO is at all right. In fact, as a Christian myself I disagree with his methods and what he is saying, but that is beside the point. Lets just all stick to the topic at hand and not make these kind of remarks, ok? >>



Okay, I'm typically pretty tolerant of religious types, (see my defense of PasterDon in the 666 thread, which quickly became a bash-fest -- also notice my (and others') first 'shot across the bow' in this thread warning him that simple fundamental religious posturing was NOT going to work here), but when MrPalco refused to post anything worthwhile and only replied with a snobby 'I know freedom, I know the truth, you shall see the truth in the future' attitude without making any effort at all to be reasonable or persuasive, (I had asked him what religion he was and was expecting him to quote from the Bible, and I would have responded with other quotes from the Bible to attempt to reason with him within the framework of his religion), I really didn't have a problem with resorting to ridicule, because his closed-mindedness to what we had to say was far greater than my closed-mindedness when it comes to religion. The whole purpose of this forum and thread is COMMUNICATION and DEBATE. He's perfectly welcome to his opinion, but when he states it over and over again without any attempt to have a proper DISCUSSION and DEBATE but rather shows complete DISREGARD for what others are saying, I don't see any reason not to dismiss him as the crazy person that he is, and to ridicule him as such. He showed us exactly how much he cared for what we said, and we just replied in kind.

As for Red Dawn, he just loves saying things to piss people off

 

[Red Dawn]

<< ok wbwither and red dawn, you guys need to calm down. Red dawn, normally have at least semi-decent things to say, but this whole "lets crap on religion because some strage person is ticking me off" really makes you sound immature. . >>



He's strange alright but not strange as in I haven't seen him before.

<< You don't like religion, fine, but respect those in the community who are religous. >>

I respect those who deserve respect despite their religious affiliations. Paltroll isn't one of those




<< Same with you wbwither, you need to back off as well. The mods will ban any topic relating to religion if they turn into crap fest like this, they did it on the hot deals forum for a while so they can do it here >>

BS, Religion isn't immune to criticism, especially here in Off Topic.

 

[MrPALCO]

The whole purpose of this forum and thread is COMMUNICATION and DEBATE.

This Forum is, "A public meeting place, a Pub, if you will... A place for computer junkies to boldly post Off Topic... Things you might want to tell everyone... Or things you wouldn't say to anyone else."

Of course we know that the Mods still hold sway if decorum is violated.

MrPalco refused to post anything worthwhile

Truth is I posted Words that can not be overcome.

I have observed a desire to pull the debate away from the Standard. A refusal to leave the Standard cause?s much consternation. This isn?t the Harvard Debating Society and the rules of debate are not in the charter of this forum.

In the past some have dealt with my brothers who are babes that mistook the purpose of this forum to show kindness and to foolishly share their pearls with a pig. That pig will always turn and trample the pearl under foot.

No pig can defeat the Standard.



ed...spacing

 

[Red Dawn]

Bacon Boy

<< No pig can defeat the Standard. >>

 

[bizmark]

<< The whole purpose of this forum and thread is COMMUNICATION and DEBATE.

This Forum is, "A public meeting place, a Pub, if you will... A place for computer junkies to boldly post Off Topic... Things you might want to tell everyone... Or things you wouldn't say to anyone else." >>



Mmm-hmm, notice that I included "forum and thread". This thread is about a political situation in the Middle East. If you choose to see it as a religious situation (which it undoubtedly is to some extent), we welcome your views and would like to hear more from you in that regard, as long as you are reasonable about things and follow such traditional rules of debate as providing evidence when it's asked for and admitting that you're wrong when you're proven so.

Okay, what is your purpose for being here? Why have you posted in this thread? Is it to try and change people's minds, or is your only goal to piss people off? It sounds to me like you're at least trying to be somewhat persuasive. Why not explain things? Why simply repeat the same thing over and over? Are you *trying* to turn people away? Does God want you to be so adament in your ways that you actually make people believe LESS in what you have to say? Does God want you to cause more people to dismiss religion as a bunch of hooey?? Because that's all that you're doing right now. I hope God is okay with that. Or does God consider me to be a pig, as you do? Am I not worth saving?



<< MrPalco refused to post anything worthwhile

Truth is I posted Words that can not be overcome.

I have observed a desire to pull the debate away from the Standard. A refusal to leave the Standard cause?s much consternation. This isn?t the Harvard Debating Society and the rules of debate are not in the charter of this forum.

In the past some have dealt with my brothers who are babes that mistook the purpose of this forum to show kindness and to foolishly share their pearls with a pig. That pig will always turn and trample the pearl under foot.

No pig can defeat the Standard. >>



The Standard? What's the Standard? Please enlighten us O Wise One. Oh, wait, never mind, for you to do so would be to wave your pearls before swine, and swine always trample pearls. Well you're wrong about that, because if you had anything even semi-reasonable to say, I would respect it, but I cannot respect what you are saying now.

And I'm not a fvcking pig. Furthermore, I will no longer respond to what you have to say if you cannot say something reasonable.

 

[MrPALCO]

<<we welcome your views and would like to hear more from you in that regard>>


Who is "we" and by what authority does "we" decide weather or not my view will be heard?

<<Okay, what is your purpose for being here?>>


I have already stated my purpose.

<<Or does God consider me to be a pig, as you do?>>


Please provide a quote where I called you a "pig". You will not find it
.
<<Furthermore, I will no longer respond to what you have to say if you cannot say something reasonable.>>


Someone said "In the past The bully has run ruff shod over my brothers with glee. Big brother is now here and the bully must now run away."

No man can offer words that will overcome the Standard.



Shalom


ed...spacing

 

[kgraeme]

<<

<<

<<
Don't attack someone stronger than you if you don't want to be killed.
>>



Might makes right? >>



No, stupidity makes dead. >>



Which makes martyrs. Which is their point. People willing to die for what they believe in the face of insurmountable odds.

Please don't mistake my understanding of their position as agreement with it. When a deal is on the table and a suicide bomber goes off and ruins the deal, I can't but shake my head in pity for both sides. But the will to fight, to defend one's home against encroachment, is worth some recognition, as is the tragedy on both sides.