Syria wants the middle east a WMD free area

[mboy]

We forget that Isreal could elimante the palestinians within 36 hours MAX if they really wanted to. Since they arent the "suicide bomber type, push them back into the ocean" types, they really are using a great deal of restraint. Just think if a group of people who were massed in 1 place started doing that to any nation, the US, Russia, China, whoever, how long those people would last on the planet. Not very long.

I also like how the ANti-semitic crowd now harps on Sharon as if he has been runnng Isreal all by himself or with his sons, nephews etc for the past 50 years. he has only been in power a few years. What about Barak, Rabin, and all of the other leaders before Sharon was ELECTED? Was it all their fault too? Funny how Araft runs the Palestinians, he is Egyptian. How come he is worth BILLIONS of $$$$ yet his people live in hovel's and eat dirt. Thats Sharon's doing right? He is funneling all of the Palestinian money and putting it into Araft's personal accounts.

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: NesuD

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: oLLie
If you guys are so afraid of Israel's WMDs, why don't we see Israel trying to invade or attack its neighbors? I just see Israel trying to assert its right to exist. Some of you seem to think Israel has other plans... enlighten me.

Oh please, do a google on Israel and occupation... Include Syria and the Golan heights to narrow the results down a bit, that is just one example...

Umm if i remember my history correctly Israel took the Golan heights in the 1967 war after they were attacked by Syria among others. Basically the Golan has high strategic value from a military perspective and is held as a defensive measure to prevent the Syrian Army from attacking Israel from there as they did in 1967.

I'm not disputing that, but it is still occupied territory...

I am not for or against either side, i am not pro or anti war either, but facts are facts, occupied territory should be returned in my opinion...

 

[auntsally]

Why not support the opposite situation: that every country in the region has WMD. That should keep the peace (hey, its worked for the US and Russia since the cold-war started).

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: mboy
We forget that Isreal could elimante the palestinians within 36 hours MAX if they really wanted to. Since they arent the "suicide bomber type, push them back into the ocean" types, they really are using a great deal of restraint. Just think if a group of people who were massed in 1 place started doing that to any nation, the US, Russia, China, whoever, how long those people would last on the planet. Not very long.

I also like how the ANti-semitic crowd now harps on Sharon as if he has been runnng Isreal all by himself or with his sons, nephews etc for the past 50 years. he has only been in power a few years. What about Barak, Rabin, and all of the other leaders before Sharon was ELECTED? Was it all their fault too? Funny how Araft runs the Palestinians, he is Egyptian. How come he is worth BILLIONS of $$$$ yet his people live in hovel's and eat dirt. Thats Sharon's doing right? He is funneling all of the Palestinian money and putting it into Araft's personal accounts.

I was expecting the argument regarding the "anti-semitic crowd"... you just have to praise Israel, if you don't you are anti semitic...

Who is Araft? And why did you have to bring the Palestinian leader into this thread, because you had to use the Anti-semite card...

 

[mboy]

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: mboy
We forget that Isreal could elimante the palestinians within 36 hours MAX if they really wanted to. Since they arent the "suicide bomber type, push them back into the ocean" types, they really are using a great deal of restraint. Just think if a group of people who were massed in 1 place started doing that to any nation, the US, Russia, China, whoever, how long those people would last on the planet. Not very long.

I also like how the ANti-semitic crowd now harps on Sharon as if he has been runnng Isreal all by himself or with his sons, nephews etc for the past 50 years. he has only been in power a few years. What about Barak, Rabin, and all of the other leaders before Sharon was ELECTED? Was it all their fault too? Funny how Araft runs the Palestinians, he is Egyptian. How come he is worth BILLIONS of $$$$ yet his people live in hovel's and eat dirt. Thats Sharon's doing right? He is funneling all of the Palestinian money and putting it into Araft's personal accounts.

I was expecting the argument regarding the "anti-semitic crowd"... you just have to praise Israel, if you don't you are anti semitic...

Who is Araft? And why did you have to bring the Palestinian leader into this thread, because you had to use the Anti-semite card...

So what your really saying is that Arafat is anti-semetic and that is his REAL beef with Isreal, correct?

People brought up Isreal and the Arab conflict in this thread. All the Arabs blame their hatred of Isreal on the Palestinian conflict, so is that not relevant here? Espcially since it is in repsonse to other posts?

And I am not praising Isreal either, but I do not condem them for keeping land that THEY won in a battle of aggression that was brought to them. I think they should quit settling and dismantle a good chunk of settlments. I certainly dont praise the dictators who run most middle east countries that squander all of the countries $$$ at the expense of their dirt poor population? At least u dont see the leaders of Isreal building themselves palaces and driving a fleet of bently's while their avg. citizen can barely afford a loaf of bread and a 6pack of Heinekens.

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: mboy

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: mboy
We forget that Isreal could elimante the palestinians within 36 hours MAX if they really wanted to. Since they arent the "suicide bomber type, push them back into the ocean" types, they really are using a great deal of restraint. Just think if a group of people who were massed in 1 place started doing that to any nation, the US, Russia, China, whoever, how long those people would last on the planet. Not very long.

I also like how the ANti-semitic crowd now harps on Sharon as if he has been runnng Isreal all by himself or with his sons, nephews etc for the past 50 years. he has only been in power a few years. What about Barak, Rabin, and all of the other leaders before Sharon was ELECTED? Was it all their fault too? Funny how Araft runs the Palestinians, he is Egyptian. How come he is worth BILLIONS of $$$$ yet his people live in hovel's and eat dirt. Thats Sharon's doing right? He is funneling all of the Palestinian money and putting it into Araft's personal accounts.

I was expecting the argument regarding the "anti-semitic crowd"... you just have to praise Israel, if you don't you are anti semitic...

Who is Araft? And why did you have to bring the Palestinian leader into this thread, because you had to use the Anti-semite card...

So what your really saying is that Arafat is anti-semetic and that is his REAL beef with Isreal, correct?

People brought up Isreal and the Arab conflict in this thread. All the Arabs blame their hatred of Isreal on the Palestinian conflict, so is that not relevant here? Espcially since it is in repsonse to other posts?

What i am saying is that if people fail to play the race card they will try to play the anti-semitism card, because they know their arguments are wearing thin...

You do have to realize that as an occupying force the Isreaelis have to expect encounters...

Skip the anti-semite bashing and maybe you can produce a reasonable argument...

 

[LilBlinbBlahIce]

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: mboy

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: mboy
We forget that Isreal could elimante the palestinians within 36 hours MAX if they really wanted to. Since they arent the "suicide bomber type, push them back into the ocean" types, they really are using a great deal of restraint. Just think if a group of people who were massed in 1 place started doing that to any nation, the US, Russia, China, whoever, how long those people would last on the planet. Not very long.

I also like how the ANti-semitic crowd now harps on Sharon as if he has been runnng Isreal all by himself or with his sons, nephews etc for the past 50 years. he has only been in power a few years. What about Barak, Rabin, and all of the other leaders before Sharon was ELECTED? Was it all their fault too? Funny how Araft runs the Palestinians, he is Egyptian. How come he is worth BILLIONS of $$$$ yet his people live in hovel's and eat dirt. Thats Sharon's doing right? He is funneling all of the Palestinian money and putting it into Araft's personal accounts.

I was expecting the argument regarding the "anti-semitic crowd"... you just have to praise Israel, if you don't you are anti semitic...

Who is Araft? And why did you have to bring the Palestinian leader into this thread, because you had to use the Anti-semite card...

So what your really saying is that Arafat is anti-semetic and that is his REAL beef with Isreal, correct?

People brought up Isreal and the Arab conflict in this thread. All the Arabs blame their hatred of Isreal on the Palestinian conflict, so is that not relevant here? Espcially since it is in repsonse to other posts?

What i am saying is that if people fail to play the race card they will try to play the anti-semitism card, because they know their arguments are wearing thin...

You do have to realize that as an occupying force the Isreaelis have to expect encounters...

Skip the anti-semite bashing and maybe you can produce a reasonable argument...

Yeah, the Anti-Semetic argument is such a pathetic way to dismiss current problems. Most people don't realize that the Palestinians are Semites too. Yeah that's right, being a Semite does not meen you are Jewish, it is the race of people who live in that particular area of the world. It's just a term hijacked by certain individuals to use as a scarlet letter on anyone who dares critisize the actions of Israel, and their liberal use of it dilutes its effect to the point that when it is used correctly, say in the mistreatment of Jews in Europe, it has lost all its impact.

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: mboy

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: mboy
We forget that Isreal could elimante the palestinians within 36 hours MAX if they really wanted to. Since they arent the "suicide bomber type, push them back into the ocean" types, they really are using a great deal of restraint. Just think if a group of people who were massed in 1 place started doing that to any nation, the US, Russia, China, whoever, how long those people would last on the planet. Not very long.

I also like how the ANti-semitic crowd now harps on Sharon as if he has been runnng Isreal all by himself or with his sons, nephews etc for the past 50 years. he has only been in power a few years. What about Barak, Rabin, and all of the other leaders before Sharon was ELECTED? Was it all their fault too? Funny how Araft runs the Palestinians, he is Egyptian. How come he is worth BILLIONS of $$$$ yet his people live in hovel's and eat dirt. Thats Sharon's doing right? He is funneling all of the Palestinian money and putting it into Araft's personal accounts.

I was expecting the argument regarding the "anti-semitic crowd"... you just have to praise Israel, if you don't you are anti semitic...

Who is Araft? And why did you have to bring the Palestinian leader into this thread, because you had to use the Anti-semite card...

So what your really saying is that Arafat is anti-semetic and that is his REAL beef with Isreal, correct?

People brought up Isreal and the Arab conflict in this thread. All the Arabs blame their hatred of Isreal on the Palestinian conflict, so is that not relevant here? Espcially since it is in repsonse to other posts?

What i am saying is that if people fail to play the race card they will try to play the anti-semitism card, because they know their arguments are wearing thin...

You do have to realize that as an occupying force the Isreaelis have to expect encounters...

Skip the anti-semite bashing and maybe you can produce a reasonable argument...

Yeah, the Anti-Semetic argument is such a pathetic way to dismiss current problems. Most people don't realize that the Palestinians are Semites too. Yeah that's right, being a Semite does not meen you are Jewish, it is the race of people who live in that particular area of the world. It's just a term hijacked by certain individuals to use as a scarlet letter on anyone who dares critisize the actions of Israel, and their liberal use of it dilutes its effect to the point that when it is used correctly, say in the mistreatment of Jews in Europe, it has lost all its impact.

Well, it's just something to say when you have no reasonable argument... and yes, it is sad...

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: mboy

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: mboy
We forget that Isreal could elimante the palestinians within 36 hours MAX if they really wanted to. Since they arent the "suicide bomber type, push them back into the ocean" types, they really are using a great deal of restraint. Just think if a group of people who were massed in 1 place started doing that to any nation, the US, Russia, China, whoever, how long those people would last on the planet. Not very long.

I also like how the ANti-semitic crowd now harps on Sharon as if he has been runnng Isreal all by himself or with his sons, nephews etc for the past 50 years. he has only been in power a few years. What about Barak, Rabin, and all of the other leaders before Sharon was ELECTED? Was it all their fault too? Funny how Araft runs the Palestinians, he is Egyptian. How come he is worth BILLIONS of $$$$ yet his people live in hovel's and eat dirt. Thats Sharon's doing right? He is funneling all of the Palestinian money and putting it into Araft's personal accounts.

I was expecting the argument regarding the "anti-semitic crowd"... you just have to praise Israel, if you don't you are anti semitic...

Who is Araft? And why did you have to bring the Palestinian leader into this thread, because you had to use the Anti-semite card...

So what your really saying is that Arafat is anti-semetic and that is his REAL beef with Isreal, correct?

People brought up Isreal and the Arab conflict in this thread. All the Arabs blame their hatred of Isreal on the Palestinian conflict, so is that not relevant here? Espcially since it is in repsonse to other posts?

What i am saying is that if people fail to play the race card they will try to play the anti-semitism card, because they know their arguments are wearing thin...

You do have to realize that as an occupying force the Isreaelis have to expect encounters...

Skip the anti-semite bashing and maybe you can produce a reasonable argument...

Yeah, the Anti-Semetic argument is such a pathetic way to dismiss current problems. Most people don't realize that the Palestinians are Semites too. Yeah that's right, being a Semite does not meen you are Jewish, it is the race of people who live in that particular area of the world. It's just a term hijacked by certain individuals to use as a scarlet letter on anyone who dares critisize the actions of Israel, and their liberal use of it dilutes its effect to the point that when it is used correctly, say in the mistreatment of Jews in Europe, it has lost all its impact.

I have to ask you, "the mistreatment of Jews in Europe"?? i hope you are referring to the 40's and not today...

 

[jjones]

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: NesuD

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: oLLie
If you guys are so afraid of Israel's WMDs, why don't we see Israel trying to invade or attack its neighbors? I just see Israel trying to assert its right to exist. Some of you seem to think Israel has other plans... enlighten me.

Oh please, do a google on Israel and occupation... Include Syria and the Golan heights to narrow the results down a bit, that is just one example...

Umm if i remember my history correctly Israel took the Golan heights in the 1967 war after they were attacked by Syria among others. Basically the Golan has high strategic value from a military perspective and is held as a defensive measure to prevent the Syrian Army from attacking Israel from there as they did in 1967.

I'm not disputing that, but it is still occupied territory...

I am not for or against either side, i am not pro or anti war either, but facts are facts, occupied territory should be returned in my opinion...

Actually, you should dispute it in that Israel launched what was incredibly portrayed as a pre-emptive strike on the Arabs massing troops at the border.

As noted, the Golan, acquired during the Six Day War along with the West Bank, Gaza, and the Sinai Peninsula, is strategically important for the Israelis and not likely to be given up until very deep changes occur within the psyche of the Syrians regarding their relationship to Israel. Israel will never be so confident that they would relinquish that piece of ground until they are completely assured that in doing so, it will not be a contributor to weakening their defense.

Also, on another similar subject regarding occupied land, it's odd how the Europeans and the UN never had any problems when Jordan occupied the West Bank or Egypt the Gaza. As soon as Israel became the occupiers then suddenly there were problems and the "world" noted the squalid conditions that the Palestinians had been subject to. The responsibility of course was immediately dumped upon the Israelis and soon there were resolutions coming out of the UN. Quickly came the call for a Palestinian nation.

Why is it that the Europeans and the UN do not take note of Arab oppressing Arab, but as soon as Israel gets involved then they are immediately complaining of Israeli misdeeds or off to a quick support on the side of the Arabs?

 

[LilBlinbBlahIce]

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: mboy

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: mboy
We forget that Isreal could elimante the palestinians within 36 hours MAX if they really wanted to. Since they arent the "suicide bomber type, push them back into the ocean" types, they really are using a great deal of restraint. Just think if a group of people who were massed in 1 place started doing that to any nation, the US, Russia, China, whoever, how long those people would last on the planet. Not very long.

I also like how the ANti-semitic crowd now harps on Sharon as if he has been runnng Isreal all by himself or with his sons, nephews etc for the past 50 years. he has only been in power a few years. What about Barak, Rabin, and all of the other leaders before Sharon was ELECTED? Was it all their fault too? Funny how Araft runs the Palestinians, he is Egyptian. How come he is worth BILLIONS of $$$$ yet his people live in hovel's and eat dirt. Thats Sharon's doing right? He is funneling all of the Palestinian money and putting it into Araft's personal accounts.

I was expecting the argument regarding the "anti-semitic crowd"... you just have to praise Israel, if you don't you are anti semitic...

Who is Araft? And why did you have to bring the Palestinian leader into this thread, because you had to use the Anti-semite card...

So what your really saying is that Arafat is anti-semetic and that is his REAL beef with Isreal, correct?

People brought up Isreal and the Arab conflict in this thread. All the Arabs blame their hatred of Isreal on the Palestinian conflict, so is that not relevant here? Espcially since it is in repsonse to other posts?

What i am saying is that if people fail to play the race card they will try to play the anti-semitism card, because they know their arguments are wearing thin...

You do have to realize that as an occupying force the Isreaelis have to expect encounters...

Skip the anti-semite bashing and maybe you can produce a reasonable argument...

Yeah, the Anti-Semetic argument is such a pathetic way to dismiss current problems. Most people don't realize that the Palestinians are Semites too. Yeah that's right, being a Semite does not meen you are Jewish, it is the race of people who live in that particular area of the world. It's just a term hijacked by certain individuals to use as a scarlet letter on anyone who dares critisize the actions of Israel, and their liberal use of it dilutes its effect to the point that when it is used correctly, say in the mistreatment of Jews in Europe, it has lost all its impact.

I have to ask you, "the mistreatment of Jews in Europe"?? i hope you are referring to the 40's and not today...

There is still mistreatment of Jews in Europe today.

 

[rufruf44]

Originally posted by: jjones

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: NesuD

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: oLLie
If you guys are so afraid of Israel's WMDs, why don't we see Israel trying to invade or attack its neighbors? I just see Israel trying to assert its right to exist. Some of you seem to think Israel has other plans... enlighten me.

Oh please, do a google on Israel and occupation... Include Syria and the Golan heights to narrow the results down a bit, that is just one example...

Umm if i remember my history correctly Israel took the Golan heights in the 1967 war after they were attacked by Syria among others. Basically the Golan has high strategic value from a military perspective and is held as a defensive measure to prevent the Syrian Army from attacking Israel from there as they did in 1967.

I'm not disputing that, but it is still occupied territory...

I am not for or against either side, i am not pro or anti war either, but facts are facts, occupied territory should be returned in my opinion...

Actually, you should dispute it in that Israel launched what was incredibly portrayed as a pre-emptive strike on the Arabs massing troops at the border.

As noted, the Golan, acquired during the Six Day War along with the West Bank, Gaza, and the Sinai Peninsula, is strategically important for the Israelis and not likely to be given up until very deep changes occur within the psyche of the Syrians regarding their relationship to Israel. Israel will never be so confident that they would relinquish that piece of ground until they are completely assured that in doing so, it will not be a contributor to weakening their defense.

Also, on another similar subject regarding occupied land, it's odd how the Europeans and the UN never had any problems when Jordan occupied the West Bank or Egypt the Gaza. As soon as Israel became the occupiers then suddenly there were problems and the "world" noted the squalid conditions that the Palestinians had been subject to. The responsibility of course was immediately dumped upon the Israelis and soon there were resolutions coming out of the UN. Quickly came the call for a Palestinian nation.

Why is it that the Europeans and the UN do not take note of Arab oppressing Arab, but as soon as Israel gets involved then they are immediately complaining of Israeli misdeeds or off to a quick support on the side of the Arabs?

The same can be said about the Arabs who said nothing and do nothing while watching Iraqis being oppressed by Saddam's regime, and then yelling and cursing left and right when US comes to liberate them. Its "OK" for one of their own to do the oppresing, but its blasphemy when the unbelievers/infidel/outsider comes into play.

 

[LilBlinbBlahIce]

Originally posted by: rufruf44

Originally posted by: jjones

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: NesuD

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: oLLie
If you guys are so afraid of Israel's WMDs, why don't we see Israel trying to invade or attack its neighbors? I just see Israel trying to assert its right to exist. Some of you seem to think Israel has other plans... enlighten me.

Oh please, do a google on Israel and occupation... Include Syria and the Golan heights to narrow the results down a bit, that is just one example...

Umm if i remember my history correctly Israel took the Golan heights in the 1967 war after they were attacked by Syria among others. Basically the Golan has high strategic value from a military perspective and is held as a defensive measure to prevent the Syrian Army from attacking Israel from there as they did in 1967.

I'm not disputing that, but it is still occupied territory...

I am not for or against either side, i am not pro or anti war either, but facts are facts, occupied territory should be returned in my opinion...

Actually, you should dispute it in that Israel launched what was incredibly portrayed as a pre-emptive strike on the Arabs massing troops at the border.

As noted, the Golan, acquired during the Six Day War along with the West Bank, Gaza, and the Sinai Peninsula, is strategically important for the Israelis and not likely to be given up until very deep changes occur within the psyche of the Syrians regarding their relationship to Israel. Israel will never be so confident that they would relinquish that piece of ground until they are completely assured that in doing so, it will not be a contributor to weakening their defense.

Also, on another similar subject regarding occupied land, it's odd how the Europeans and the UN never had any problems when Jordan occupied the West Bank or Egypt the Gaza. As soon as Israel became the occupiers then suddenly there were problems and the "world" noted the squalid conditions that the Palestinians had been subject to. The responsibility of course was immediately dumped upon the Israelis and soon there were resolutions coming out of the UN. Quickly came the call for a Palestinian nation.

Why is it that the Europeans and the UN do not take note of Arab oppressing Arab, but as soon as Israel gets involved then they are immediately complaining of Israeli misdeeds or off to a quick support on the side of the Arabs?

The same can be said about the Arabs who said nothing and do nothing while watching Iraqis being oppressed by Saddam's regime, and then yelling and cursing left and right when US comes to liberate them. Its "OK" for one of their own to do the oppresing, but its blasphemy when the unbelievers/infidel/outsider comes into play.

Actually, it is the US who keeps in power despots such as the Saudi's and Hosni Mubarak. They are dictators, they have total power, why should they question other despots? As for the average Arab, what are they supposed to do? If they stand up against their goverments and demand anything, they will be crushed using US weapons. We pick and choose who is and who is not a despot based on convenience. That's why we're friends with the Saudi's and China but not with Iraq.

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: mboy

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: mboy
We forget that Isreal could elimante the palestinians within 36 hours MAX if they really wanted to. Since they arent the "suicide bomber type, push them back into the ocean" types, they really are using a great deal of restraint. Just think if a group of people who were massed in 1 place started doing that to any nation, the US, Russia, China, whoever, how long those people would last on the planet. Not very long.

I also like how the ANti-semitic crowd now harps on Sharon as if he has been runnng Isreal all by himself or with his sons, nephews etc for the past 50 years. he has only been in power a few years. What about Barak, Rabin, and all of the other leaders before Sharon was ELECTED? Was it all their fault too? Funny how Araft runs the Palestinians, he is Egyptian. How come he is worth BILLIONS of $$$$ yet his people live in hovel's and eat dirt. Thats Sharon's doing right? He is funneling all of the Palestinian money and putting it into Araft's personal accounts.

I was expecting the argument regarding the "anti-semitic crowd"... you just have to praise Israel, if you don't you are anti semitic...

Who is Araft? And why did you have to bring the Palestinian leader into this thread, because you had to use the Anti-semite card...

So what your really saying is that Arafat is anti-semetic and that is his REAL beef with Isreal, correct?

People brought up Isreal and the Arab conflict in this thread. All the Arabs blame their hatred of Isreal on the Palestinian conflict, so is that not relevant here? Espcially since it is in repsonse to other posts?

What i am saying is that if people fail to play the race card they will try to play the anti-semitism card, because they know their arguments are wearing thin...

You do have to realize that as an occupying force the Isreaelis have to expect encounters...

Skip the anti-semite bashing and maybe you can produce a reasonable argument...

Yeah, the Anti-Semetic argument is such a pathetic way to dismiss current problems. Most people don't realize that the Palestinians are Semites too. Yeah that's right, being a Semite does not meen you are Jewish, it is the race of people who live in that particular area of the world. It's just a term hijacked by certain individuals to use as a scarlet letter on anyone who dares critisize the actions of Israel, and their liberal use of it dilutes its effect to the point that when it is used correctly, say in the mistreatment of Jews in Europe, it has lost all its impact.

I have to ask you, "the mistreatment of Jews in Europe"?? i hope you are referring to the 40's and not today...

There is still mistreatment of Jews in Europe today.

OK, i live in europe, so please explain what you know that i don't...

 

[rufruf44]

Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce

Originally posted by: rufruf44

Originally posted by: jjones

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: NesuD

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: oLLie
If you guys are so afraid of Israel's WMDs, why don't we see Israel trying to invade or attack its neighbors? I just see Israel trying to assert its right to exist. Some of you seem to think Israel has other plans... enlighten me.

Oh please, do a google on Israel and occupation... Include Syria and the Golan heights to narrow the results down a bit, that is just one example...

Umm if i remember my history correctly Israel took the Golan heights in the 1967 war after they were attacked by Syria among others. Basically the Golan has high strategic value from a military perspective and is held as a defensive measure to prevent the Syrian Army from attacking Israel from there as they did in 1967.

I'm not disputing that, but it is still occupied territory...

I am not for or against either side, i am not pro or anti war either, but facts are facts, occupied territory should be returned in my opinion...

Actually, you should dispute it in that Israel launched what was incredibly portrayed as a pre-emptive strike on the Arabs massing troops at the border.

As noted, the Golan, acquired during the Six Day War along with the West Bank, Gaza, and the Sinai Peninsula, is strategically important for the Israelis and not likely to be given up until very deep changes occur within the psyche of the Syrians regarding their relationship to Israel. Israel will never be so confident that they would relinquish that piece of ground until they are completely assured that in doing so, it will not be a contributor to weakening their defense.

Also, on another similar subject regarding occupied land, it's odd how the Europeans and the UN never had any problems when Jordan occupied the West Bank or Egypt the Gaza. As soon as Israel became the occupiers then suddenly there were problems and the "world" noted the squalid conditions that the Palestinians had been subject to. The responsibility of course was immediately dumped upon the Israelis and soon there were resolutions coming out of the UN. Quickly came the call for a Palestinian nation.

Why is it that the Europeans and the UN do not take note of Arab oppressing Arab, but as soon as Israel gets involved then they are immediately complaining of Israeli misdeeds or off to a quick support on the side of the Arabs?

The same can be said about the Arabs who said nothing and do nothing while watching Iraqis being oppressed by Saddam's regime, and then yelling and cursing left and right when US comes to liberate them. Its "OK" for one of their own to do the oppresing, but its blasphemy when the unbelievers/infidel/outsider comes into play.

Actually, it is the US who keeps in power despots such as the Saudi's and Hosni Mubarak. They are dictators, they have total power, why should they question other despots? As for the average Arab, what are they supposed to do? If they stand up against their goverments and demand anything, they will be crushed using US weapons. We pick and choose who is and who is not a despot based on convenience. That's why we're friends with the Saudi's and China but not with Iraq.

That doesn't explain why the Arabs doesn't parade and march in street demanding the abdication of Saddam like they did now with the US. Are you saying Mubarrak and Saudi's royal family will crush them with guns if they protest against Saddam?

 

[LilBlinbBlahIce]

Originally posted by: rufruf44

Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce

Originally posted by: rufruf44

Originally posted by: jjones

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: NesuD

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: oLLie
If you guys are so afraid of Israel's WMDs, why don't we see Israel trying to invade or attack its neighbors? I just see Israel trying to assert its right to exist. Some of you seem to think Israel has other plans... enlighten me.

Oh please, do a google on Israel and occupation... Include Syria and the Golan heights to narrow the results down a bit, that is just one example...

Umm if i remember my history correctly Israel took the Golan heights in the 1967 war after they were attacked by Syria among others. Basically the Golan has high strategic value from a military perspective and is held as a defensive measure to prevent the Syrian Army from attacking Israel from there as they did in 1967.

I'm not disputing that, but it is still occupied territory...

I am not for or against either side, i am not pro or anti war either, but facts are facts, occupied territory should be returned in my opinion...

Actually, you should dispute it in that Israel launched what was incredibly portrayed as a pre-emptive strike on the Arabs massing troops at the border.

As noted, the Golan, acquired during the Six Day War along with the West Bank, Gaza, and the Sinai Peninsula, is strategically important for the Israelis and not likely to be given up until very deep changes occur within the psyche of the Syrians regarding their relationship to Israel. Israel will never be so confident that they would relinquish that piece of ground until they are completely assured that in doing so, it will not be a contributor to weakening their defense.

Also, on another similar subject regarding occupied land, it's odd how the Europeans and the UN never had any problems when Jordan occupied the West Bank or Egypt the Gaza. As soon as Israel became the occupiers then suddenly there were problems and the "world" noted the squalid conditions that the Palestinians had been subject to. The responsibility of course was immediately dumped upon the Israelis and soon there were resolutions coming out of the UN. Quickly came the call for a Palestinian nation.

Why is it that the Europeans and the UN do not take note of Arab oppressing Arab, but as soon as Israel gets involved then they are immediately complaining of Israeli misdeeds or off to a quick support on the side of the Arabs?

The same can be said about the Arabs who said nothing and do nothing while watching Iraqis being oppressed by Saddam's regime, and then yelling and cursing left and right when US comes to liberate them. Its "OK" for one of their own to do the oppresing, but its blasphemy when the unbelievers/infidel/outsider comes into play.

Actually, it is the US who keeps in power despots such as the Saudi's and Hosni Mubarak. They are dictators, they have total power, why should they question other despots? As for the average Arab, what are they supposed to do? If they stand up against their goverments and demand anything, they will be crushed using US weapons. We pick and choose who is and who is not a despot based on convenience. That's why we're friends with the Saudi's and China but not with Iraq.

That doesn't explain why the Arabs doesn't parade and march in street demanding the abdication of Saddam like they did now with the US. Are you saying Mubarrak and Saudi's royal family will crush them with guns if they protest against Saddam?

No, but I am saying that they see Saddam as a sort of hero for standing up to the US so they would not protest against him anyway. I'm not saying its right, but that's definetely the way a lot of people see it. Besides, even if they did protest against him, do you think their govs. would do anything about it? I seriously doubt it. Furthermore, I think the Arabs would support Saddam any day over Americans, regardless of how cruel he is. There is just too much mistrust, America has abandoned them too many times (ie: Afghanistan post USSR, the Shiite uprising after the Gulf War where we abandoned them and allowed them to be slaughtered by Saddam)

 

[mboy]

The best thing that ever ha[ppened to Arabs and the feifdoms/dictatorships in the middle east is Isreal. If it wasn't for Isreal, then all those arabs and other middle east countries would be fighting and killing each other. Quite frankly, they got lucky with Isreal AND oil. If it wasnt for either, they would still be eating dirt (actually most do anyway since they are pretty much stuck in the 15th century except their wealthy kingdoms) and killing each other.
SnapIt, why dont u tel me again how the Land Isreal won in a fair and square war is not really theirs, that they should just give it back and groups like Hamas will come over, hug them and say we aere sorry, we rerspect your right to exist.

You must be Swedish or something right?

 

[SnapIT]

Now LilBlinbBlahIce...

Would you explain to me how the jews situation in Europe is difficult...

Please, i would love to hear it...

Oh, and i will continue to ask you until you answer...

 

[DT4K]

Originally posted by: SnapIT
Last time i looked i was not Syria, and i'm the one making that statement at this point...

The thing is, to bring lasting peace to the region, you have to control the most agressive state in the middle east, that would be Israel, NOBODY has ever disputed that fact...

I guess someone could try, and be proven wrong...

You are joking right?

Did you mean "it" was not Syria?
Maybe I misunderstood you, but Syria has occupied Lebanon since 1990. The U.S. agreed to ignore this fact in return for Syrian cooperation in the first Gulf War.

since NOBODY has ever disputed that Israel is the most aggresive state in the middle east, I guess I'll be the first one ever.

Israel is NOT the most aggressive state in the middle east.
They are not the ones who's charter included the goal of destroying an entire group of people. No, that was the Palestinians.
Israel is NOT the one who caused the death of over 1 million people by attacking their neigboring country with VX nerve gas. No, that was Iraq.
Israel is NOT the one sponsoring and supporting terroris groups. No, that would be Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Libya.

Israel has not been fighting to take over the middle east. With their nuclear capabilities, they could have if they really wanted to. Israel has been fighting for their survival as a state in the middle east for many years. It is countries like Syria and Iraq who have been invading other countries and trying to expand their territory.

Israel does not need to be controlled. They need to be protected. Protected from all the Arab nations who want Israel to cease to exist.

 

[LilBlinbBlahIce]

Originally posted by: SnapIT
Now LilBlinbBlahIce...

Would you explain to me how the jews situation in Europe is difficult...

Please, i would love to hear it...

Oh, and i will continue to ask you until you answer...

Who said it is difficult? I'm just saying that they are still unjustly treated in many countries. Is that not true? There has been a major increase in Anti-Jewish activity recently hasn't there? I hope you understand what I tried to say now.

 

[LilBlinbBlahIce]

Originally posted by: Shanti

Originally posted by: SnapIT
Last time i looked i was not Syria, and i'm the one making that statement at this point...

The thing is, to bring lasting peace to the region, you have to control the most agressive state in the middle east, that would be Israel, NOBODY has ever disputed that fact...

I guess someone could try, and be proven wrong...

You are joking right?

Did you mean "it" was not Syria?
Maybe I misunderstood you, but Syria has occupied Lebanon since 1990. The U.S. agreed to ignore this fact in return for Syrian cooperation in the first Gulf War.

since NOBODY has ever disputed that Israel is the most aggresive state in the middle east, I guess I'll be the first one ever.

Israel is NOT the most aggressive state in the middle east.
They are not the ones who's charter included the goal of destroying an entire group of people. No, that was the Palestinians.
Israel is NOT the one who caused the death of over 1 million people by attacking their neigboring country with VX nerve gas. No, that was Iraq.
Israel is NOT the one sponsoring and supporting terroris groups. No, that would be Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Libya.

Israel has not been fighting to take over the middle east. With their nuclear capabilities, they could have if they really wanted to. Israel has been fighting for their survival as a state in the middle east for many years. It is countries like Syria and Iraq who have been invading other countries and trying to expand their territory.

Israel does not need to be controlled. They need to be protected. Protected from all the Arab nations who want Israel to cease to exist.

You're right, actually all Israel is guilty of is coming to a land that was not theirs, displacing an entire people using US supplied weapons and colonizing thier land. And don't feed me that "it's in the Bible so it's OK" crap, it would not be if it was your house that was taken away, or your kids who had to grow up in some refugee camp. The only thing that makes it OK is the UN recognizing the state of Israel under intense US pressure.

 

[DT4K]

Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce

Originally posted by: Shanti

Originally posted by: SnapIT
Last time i looked i was not Syria, and i'm the one making that statement at this point...

The thing is, to bring lasting peace to the region, you have to control the most agressive state in the middle east, that would be Israel, NOBODY has ever disputed that fact...

I guess someone could try, and be proven wrong...

You are joking right?

Did you mean "it" was not Syria?
Maybe I misunderstood you, but Syria has occupied Lebanon since 1990. The U.S. agreed to ignore this fact in return for Syrian cooperation in the first Gulf War.

since NOBODY has ever disputed that Israel is the most aggresive state in the middle east, I guess I'll be the first one ever.

Israel is NOT the most aggressive state in the middle east.
They are not the ones who's charter included the goal of destroying an entire group of people. No, that was the Palestinians.
Israel is NOT the one who caused the death of over 1 million people by attacking their neigboring country with VX nerve gas. No, that was Iraq.
Israel is NOT the one sponsoring and supporting terroris groups. No, that would be Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Libya.

Israel has not been fighting to take over the middle east. With their nuclear capabilities, they could have if they really wanted to. Israel has been fighting for their survival as a state in the middle east for many years. It is countries like Syria and Iraq who have been invading other countries and trying to expand their territory.

Israel does not need to be controlled. They need to be protected. Protected from all the Arab nations who want Israel to cease to exist.

You're right, actually all Israel is guilty of is coming to a land that was not theirs, displacing an entire people using US supplied weapons and colonizing thier land. And don't feed me that "it's in the Bible so it's OK" crap, it would not be if it was your house that was taken away, or your kids who had to grow up in some refugee camp. The only thing that makes it OK is the UN recognizing the state of Israel under intense US pressure.

Do you live in America? Are you Native American? If not then go back to wherever you came from and shut up because all of us here now are living on land that once belonged to the Native Americans. So what if it was hundreds of years ago. It was their land and the caucasians killed them and stole their lands and their homes. Was that wrong? Yes. Should we all move back to Europe? No.

It is so useless to argue this. Even if you think we should decide the Palestinian / Israeli issue based on who was there originally, how can you claim you know who's land it was? It all depends on how far back in history you want to go.

We know that Israel was the home of the Jews in 1700 BC. It wasn't until around 600 A.D. that Arab people had a strong presence in that area. What gives you the right to determine which time period to pick. Why is one particular time in history when Arabs lived there somehow more valid than one particular time in history when it was occupied by Jews. I could just as easily say that all the Palestinians should be kicked out because the Jews were there first. I mean how do you really decide. The farther back in history you go, the harder it is to be sure of who's land it is.

Arguments like this are the cause of most conflicts in the world. The way I see it, there is no easy way to do this. So the only real way is to try to come to some compromise everyone can live with.

I am not some kind of racist. I have no bias against Arabs.

The Palestinians have expressed openly their desire to eliminate the state of Israel. The Israeli's have said nothing like this about the Palestinians and have take no action which would show a desire to eliminate Palestine.

The Palestinians and many other Arab nations have used the murder of innocent civilian men, women, and children as a "tactic" for decades to try to achieve their goal of destroying Jews.
The Israeli's have not. I am not saying the Israeli's have never harmed civilians. Clearly there have been incidents on both sides. But the Israeli's have not supported terrorist training camps and intentionally and specifically targeted civilians.

 

[LilBlinbBlahIce]

Originally posted by: Shanti

Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce

Originally posted by: Shanti

Originally posted by: SnapIT
Last time i looked i was not Syria, and i'm the one making that statement at this point...

The thing is, to bring lasting peace to the region, you have to control the most agressive state in the middle east, that would be Israel, NOBODY has ever disputed that fact...

I guess someone could try, and be proven wrong...

You are joking right?

Did you mean "it" was not Syria?
Maybe I misunderstood you, but Syria has occupied Lebanon since 1990. The U.S. agreed to ignore this fact in return for Syrian cooperation in the first Gulf War.

since NOBODY has ever disputed that Israel is the most aggresive state in the middle east, I guess I'll be the first one ever.

Israel is NOT the most aggressive state in the middle east.
They are not the ones who's charter included the goal of destroying an entire group of people. No, that was the Palestinians.
Israel is NOT the one who caused the death of over 1 million people by attacking their neigboring country with VX nerve gas. No, that was Iraq.
Israel is NOT the one sponsoring and supporting terroris groups. No, that would be Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Libya.

Israel has not been fighting to take over the middle east. With their nuclear capabilities, they could have if they really wanted to. Israel has been fighting for their survival as a state in the middle east for many years. It is countries like Syria and Iraq who have been invading other countries and trying to expand their territory.

Israel does not need to be controlled. They need to be protected. Protected from all the Arab nations who want Israel to cease to exist.

You're right, actually all Israel is guilty of is coming to a land that was not theirs, displacing an entire people using US supplied weapons and colonizing thier land. And don't feed me that "it's in the Bible so it's OK" crap, it would not be if it was your house that was taken away, or your kids who had to grow up in some refugee camp. The only thing that makes it OK is the UN recognizing the state of Israel under intense US pressure.

Do you live in America? Are you Native American? If not then go back to wherever you came from and shut up because all of us here now are living on land that once belonged to the Native Americans. So what if it was hundreds of years ago. It was their land and the caucasians killed them and stole their lands and their homes. Was that wrong? Yes. Should we all move back to Europe? No.

It is so useless to argue this. Even if you think we should decide the Palestinian / Israeli issue based on who was there originally, how can you claim you know who's land it was? It all depends on how far back in history you want to go.

We know that Israel was the home of the Jews in 1700 BC. It wasn't until around 600 A.D. that Arab people had a strong presence in that area. What gives you the right to determine which time period to pick. Why is one particular time in history when Arabs lived there somehow more valid than one particular time in history when it was occupied by Jews. I could just as easily say that all the Palestinians should be kicked out because the Jews were there first. I mean how do you really decide. The farther back in history you go, the harder it is to be sure of who's land it is.

Arguments like this are the cause of most conflicts in the world. The way I see it, there is no easy way to do this. So the only real way is to try to come to some compromise everyone can live with.

I am not some kind of racist. I have no bias against Arabs.

The Palestinians have expressed openly their desire to eliminate the state of Israel. The Israeli's have said nothing like this about the Palestinians and have take no action which would show a desire to eliminate Palestine.

The Palestinians and many other Arab nations have used the murder of innocent civilian men, women, and children as a "tactic" for decades to try to achieve their goal of destroying Jews.
The Israeli's have not. I am not saying the Israeli's have never harmed civilians. Clearly there have been incidents on both sides. But the Israeli's have not supported terrorist training camps and intentionally and specifically targeted civilians.

Yes I am an American. I am not saying that Israel should be destroyed, but like you said: "It was their land and the caucasians killed them and stole their lands and their homes. Was that wrong? Yes." Same thing here. It was wrong, but what is done is done. As for you saying: "The Palestinians have expressed openly their desire to eliminate the state of Israel. The Israeli's have said nothing like this about the Palestinians and have take no action which would show a desire to eliminate Palestine." They don't need to. First of all, there is no Palestine, there are the Occupied Territories. Secondly, They use a good chunk of the 3.5 billion dollars my tax money helps give them every year to build and maintian settlements on occupied land. They don't need to get rid of the Palestininas or even bother saying anything like that. They are just dominating them, slowly taking their land, keeping them under complete control, just like white South Africans kept blacks on the proberbial leash during apartheid. If they want to shut down the occupied territories, they can. If they wan't to demolish property on Palestinian controled land, they will bring in their bulldozers and shoot anyone, even rock throwing kids, who try to stop them. I am against the killing of innocent civilians anywhere, and I think suicide bombings are terrble and go against the teachings of Islam. But for every Israeli killed in this recent conflict, 3 Palestinians die. When the Israelis go to take out a militant, they do not hesitate to fire a rocket into a crowded street. Any civilians killed are colateral dammage. What's worse, intentionally targetting civilians or not giving a rat's ass when you kill them?

 

[DT4K]

Well, I'd have to say intentionally targeting civilians is worse than accidentally killing civilians when targeting a terrorist.
Seems obvious to me.

You are still talking about it being Palestinian land that is occupied by Israelis. You completely ignored my point. Maybe it's Israeli land that they have taken back after the Palestinians stole it. After all, the Jews were there first.

 

[LilBlinbBlahIce]

Originally posted by: Shanti
Well, I'd have to say intentionally targeting civilians is worse than accidentally killing civilians when targeting a terrorist.
Seems obvious to me.

You are still talking about it being Palestinian land that is occupied by Israelis. You completely ignored my point. Maybe it's Israeli land that they have taken back after the Palestinians stole it. After all, the Jews were there first.

So, say hypothetically, Native Americans suddently aquiered some great force and took back portions of America, would that be OK? After all, they were here first.