This is why Israel is awesome

[ForumMaster]

yeah you see that a lot during the weekend. i went to tel Aviv on Friday. when i came back on Saturday, the trains are always filled with soldiers that all have their M-16's. frankly, it's not such a good situation that you always need to be ready for war. plus the m-16 is annoying to carry around all the time. and leaving your weapon even for a minute is quite understandably a crime.

as for pics of the landscape,
meron mountain

panaromic view of the meron mountain

meron mountain in the early morning. yes that is a military installation at the top.

the hermon mountain

the hermon mountain 2

and another good pic in that site.

 

[ForumMaster]

Originally posted by: Flyback

Originally posted by: Amused
Well, for the military buff, Israel's army is awesome. It is, man for man, the best in the world. It's sad they are forced to be that way, but one can still admire it.

Yeah--isn't it mandatory to serve for 1-2 years there? Crappy deal, but I guess that is the price they pay to have a country.

actually, 3 years minimum for guys and 2 for girls. but in reality, only a tiny fraction do the actual fighting. for example, since i have a medical condition, I'm not going to get a fighting position but rather (hopefully) a position involving CCNA and programming. but it isn't that bad when everybody has to do it. then it becomes sort of a ritual that everybody goes through.

 

[ForumMaster]

Originally posted by: freshgeardude
P.S. im in a city called Kefar Saba

sweet. i often visit my grandparents that live in kefar hess. really really close. right near tel mond.

 

[aphex]

I can't wait to go to Israel... Wonder if they still over that free trip and how old you can be for it...

 

[ForumMaster]

Originally posted by: freshgeardude
neither do i i know some words but if you are with someone that speaks hebrew you can ask him to translate for you. btw a lot of people speak english here

when learning english is mandatory and is the second official language of the country, you'd expect the locales to have a basic grasp of it. since a lot of kids are getting more and more into the net, english is infiltrating every aspect of life and you'll rarely be in situations where you can't get by with just english.

 

[ForumMaster]

Originally posted by: mrkun

Originally posted by: Amused
Well, for the military buff, Israel's army is awesome. It is, man for man, the best in the world. It's sad they are forced to be that way, but one can still admire it.

Umm, they couldn't even beat Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon?

and...could the mighty US military defeat the taliban or al quida? fighting guerrillas is difficult when they use civilians as human shields cause they know that we don't want to hurt civilians.

 

[DarkThinker]

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: mrkun

Originally posted by: rdubbz420

Originally posted by: mrkun

Originally posted by: Amused
Well, for the military buff, Israel's army is awesome. It is, man for man, the best in the world. It's sad they are forced to be that way, but one can still admire it.

Umm, they couldn't even beat Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon?

Depends on what you consider a win? I know there were allot more dead Hezbollah than Israelis. Yes Israel didn?t complete objectives, but no doubt I would rather have to fight on the Israeli side. They had way less casualties.

Yeah, but I mean they were just fighting guerrillas. After that performance do you really think they're that much better than the armies of any other Western nation? Rather, if it had been the US or UK army in their situation, do you think they would've done worse?

I don't really want to get into this argument, but "just" fighting guerrillas is alot more difficult fighting an organized army, especially if you are trying to minimize civillian casulties.

Hey everyone, I am just passing by this thread and I just had the urge to crap all over the highlighted part before I go.

k thnx bai!

<----- Eye Witness

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: DarkThinker

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: mrkun

Originally posted by: rdubbz420

Originally posted by: mrkun

Originally posted by: Amused
Well, for the military buff, Israel's army is awesome. It is, man for man, the best in the world. It's sad they are forced to be that way, but one can still admire it.

Umm, they couldn't even beat Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon?

Depends on what you consider a win? I know there were allot more dead Hezbollah than Israelis. Yes Israel didn?t complete objectives, but no doubt I would rather have to fight on the Israeli side. They had way less casualties.

Yeah, but I mean they were just fighting guerrillas. After that performance do you really think they're that much better than the armies of any other Western nation? Rather, if it had been the US or UK army in their situation, do you think they would've done worse?

I don't really want to get into this argument, but "just" fighting guerrillas is alot more difficult fighting an organized army, especially if you are trying to minimize civillian casulties.

Hey everyone, I am just passing by this thread and I just had the urge to crap all over the highlighted part before I go.

k thnx bai!

<----- Eye Witness

When was the last time Israel (or any nation) carpet bombed an entire city?

I thought not.

He said minimize, not completely stop. If you want to keep your soldiers in and among civilians and use them as shields you have to expect some civilian casualties.

 

[mrkun]

Originally posted by: ForumMaster

Originally posted by: mrkun

Originally posted by: Amused
Well, for the military buff, Israel's army is awesome. It is, man for man, the best in the world. It's sad they are forced to be that way, but one can still admire it.

Umm, they couldn't even beat Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon?

and...could the mighty US military defeat the taliban or al quida? fighting guerrillas is difficult when they use civilians as human shields cause they know that we don't want to hurt civilians.

No. What I was trying to address is Amused's comment that Israel's army is the best in the world, which I think is unfounded.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: DarkThinker

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: mrkun

Originally posted by: rdubbz420

Originally posted by: mrkun

Originally posted by: Amused
Well, for the military buff, Israel's army is awesome. It is, man for man, the best in the world. It's sad they are forced to be that way, but one can still admire it.

Umm, they couldn't even beat Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon?

Depends on what you consider a win? I know there were allot more dead Hezbollah than Israelis. Yes Israel didn?t complete objectives, but no doubt I would rather have to fight on the Israeli side. They had way less casualties.

Yeah, but I mean they were just fighting guerrillas. After that performance do you really think they're that much better than the armies of any other Western nation? Rather, if it had been the US or UK army in their situation, do you think they would've done worse?

I don't really want to get into this argument, but "just" fighting guerrillas is alot more difficult fighting an organized army, especially if you are trying to minimize civillian casulties.

Hey everyone, I am just passing by this thread and I just had the urge to crap all over the highlighted part before I go.

k thnx bai!

<----- Eye Witness

When was the last time Israel (or any nation) carpet bombed an entire city?

I thought not.

He said minimize, not completely stop. If you want to keep your soldiers in and among civilians and use them as shields you have to expect some civilian casualties.

Israel went too far during their war with Lebanon.

Why does this happen? When you are behind a desk and all you care about are your political ratings, you will give the order to do whatever necessary to win the war. You don't care about who dies on the other side. You care about your chances of winning an election or staying popular.

If the most powerful nations of the world started to elect some civilized individuals then maybe none of this brutality would happen in the first place.
Yes, my post is a direct attack at the PM of Israel.

 

[paulney]

Originally posted by: rdubbz420

Originally posted by: purbeast0
I expected some hot israeli chicks

Text

2nd row, 2nd pic from the left - Hell Yeah! :thumbsup:

 

[Mo0o]

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: DarkThinker

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: mrkun

Originally posted by: rdubbz420

Originally posted by: mrkun

Originally posted by: Amused
Well, for the military buff, Israel's army is awesome. It is, man for man, the best in the world. It's sad they are forced to be that way, but one can still admire it.

Umm, they couldn't even beat Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon?

Depends on what you consider a win? I know there were allot more dead Hezbollah than Israelis. Yes Israel didn?t complete objectives, but no doubt I would rather have to fight on the Israeli side. They had way less casualties.

Yeah, but I mean they were just fighting guerrillas. After that performance do you really think they're that much better than the armies of any other Western nation? Rather, if it had been the US or UK army in their situation, do you think they would've done worse?

I don't really want to get into this argument, but "just" fighting guerrillas is alot more difficult fighting an organized army, especially if you are trying to minimize civillian casulties.

Hey everyone, I am just passing by this thread and I just had the urge to crap all over the highlighted part before I go.

k thnx bai!

<----- Eye Witness

When was the last time Israel (or any nation) carpet bombed an entire city?

I thought not.

He said minimize, not completely stop. If you want to keep your soldiers in and among civilians and use them as shields you have to expect some civilian casualties.

Israel went too far during their war with Lebanon.

Why does this happen? When you are behind a desk and all you care about are your political ratings, you will give the order to do whatever necessary to win the war. You don't care about who dies on the other side. You care about your chances of winning an election or staying popular.

If the most powerful nations of the world started to elect some civilized individuals then maybe none of this brutality would happen in the first place.
Yes, my post is a direct attack at the PM of Israel.

Debating this is a dead end, both sides are at at fault. It would be silly to say Israel is free from blame for being in the state of constant violence it's in

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: mrkun
What I was trying to address is Amused's comment that Israel's army is the best in the world, which I think is unfounded.

Then you are utterly ignorant of Israel's history.

And not the "best in the world" period. The best "man for man."

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: DarkThinker

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: mrkun

Originally posted by: rdubbz420

Originally posted by: mrkun

Originally posted by: Amused
Well, for the military buff, Israel's army is awesome. It is, man for man, the best in the world. It's sad they are forced to be that way, but one can still admire it.

Umm, they couldn't even beat Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon?

Depends on what you consider a win? I know there were allot more dead Hezbollah than Israelis. Yes Israel didn?t complete objectives, but no doubt I would rather have to fight on the Israeli side. They had way less casualties.

Yeah, but I mean they were just fighting guerrillas. After that performance do you really think they're that much better than the armies of any other Western nation? Rather, if it had been the US or UK army in their situation, do you think they would've done worse?

I don't really want to get into this argument, but "just" fighting guerrillas is alot more difficult fighting an organized army, especially if you are trying to minimize civillian casulties.

Hey everyone, I am just passing by this thread and I just had the urge to crap all over the highlighted part before I go.

k thnx bai!

<----- Eye Witness

When was the last time Israel (or any nation) carpet bombed an entire city?

I thought not.

He said minimize, not completely stop. If you want to keep your soldiers in and among civilians and use them as shields you have to expect some civilian casualties.

Israel went too far during their war with Lebanon.

Why does this happen? When you are behind a desk and all you care about are your political ratings, you will give the order to do whatever necessary to win the war. You don't care about who dies on the other side. You care about your chances of winning an election or staying popular.

If the most powerful nations of the world started to elect some civilized individuals then maybe none of this brutality would happen in the first place.
Yes, my post is a direct attack at the PM of Israel.

Yes, of course because it's not as if Israel is surrounded by much bigger and more powerful nations who have been bent on it's utter and total destruction for 60+ years. Nope.

:roll:

If the Arab nations disarmed there would be peace. If Israel disarmed there would be no more Israel.

 

[Mo0o]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: DarkThinker

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: mrkun

Originally posted by: rdubbz420

Originally posted by: mrkun

Originally posted by: Amused
Well, for the military buff, Israel's army is awesome. It is, man for man, the best in the world. It's sad they are forced to be that way, but one can still admire it.

Umm, they couldn't even beat Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon?

Depends on what you consider a win? I know there were allot more dead Hezbollah than Israelis. Yes Israel didn?t complete objectives, but no doubt I would rather have to fight on the Israeli side. They had way less casualties.

Yeah, but I mean they were just fighting guerrillas. After that performance do you really think they're that much better than the armies of any other Western nation? Rather, if it had been the US or UK army in their situation, do you think they would've done worse?

I don't really want to get into this argument, but "just" fighting guerrillas is alot more difficult fighting an organized army, especially if you are trying to minimize civillian casulties.

Hey everyone, I am just passing by this thread and I just had the urge to crap all over the highlighted part before I go.

k thnx bai!

<----- Eye Witness

When was the last time Israel (or any nation) carpet bombed an entire city?

I thought not.

He said minimize, not completely stop. If you want to keep your soldiers in and among civilians and use them as shields you have to expect some civilian casualties.

Israel went too far during their war with Lebanon.

Why does this happen? When you are behind a desk and all you care about are your political ratings, you will give the order to do whatever necessary to win the war. You don't care about who dies on the other side. You care about your chances of winning an election or staying popular.

If the most powerful nations of the world started to elect some civilized individuals then maybe none of this brutality would happen in the first place.
Yes, my post is a direct attack at the PM of Israel.

Yes, of course because it's not as if Israel is surrounded by much bigger and more powerful nations who have been bent on it's utter and total destruction for 60+ years. Nope.

:roll:

If the Arab nations disarmed there would be peace. If Israel disarmed there would be no more Israel.

I agree that if arab nations disarmed there would be more peace but i dont think it would fully solve everything. The Palestine issue would still be there and Israelis with guns are still doing doing some questionable things there. Obviously the suicide bombings are completely wrong but I think ISraelis have done a lot to continue the tensions that exist within the occupied territories.

 

[zoiks]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: DarkThinker

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: mrkun

Originally posted by: rdubbz420

Originally posted by: mrkun

Originally posted by: Amused
Well, for the military buff, Israel's army is awesome. It is, man for man, the best in the world. It's sad they are forced to be that way, but one can still admire it.

Umm, they couldn't even beat Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon?

Depends on what you consider a win? I know there were allot more dead Hezbollah than Israelis. Yes Israel didn?t complete objectives, but no doubt I would rather have to fight on the Israeli side. They had way less casualties.

Yeah, but I mean they were just fighting guerrillas. After that performance do you really think they're that much better than the armies of any other Western nation? Rather, if it had been the US or UK army in their situation, do you think they would've done worse?

I don't really want to get into this argument, but "just" fighting guerrillas is alot more difficult fighting an organized army, especially if you are trying to minimize civillian casulties.

Hey everyone, I am just passing by this thread and I just had the urge to crap all over the highlighted part before I go.

k thnx bai!

<----- Eye Witness

When was the last time Israel (or any nation) carpet bombed an entire city?

I thought not.

He said minimize, not completely stop. If you want to keep your soldiers in and among civilians and use them as shields you have to expect some civilian casualties.

Israel went too far during their war with Lebanon.

Why does this happen? When you are behind a desk and all you care about are your political ratings, you will give the order to do whatever necessary to win the war. You don't care about who dies on the other side. You care about your chances of winning an election or staying popular.

If the most powerful nations of the world started to elect some civilized individuals then maybe none of this brutality would happen in the first place.
Yes, my post is a direct attack at the PM of Israel.

Yes, of course because it's not as if Israel is surrounded by much bigger and more powerful nations who have been bent on it's utter and total destruction for 60+ years. Nope.

:roll:

If the Arab nations disarmed there would be peace. If Israel disarmed there would be no more Israel.

BS. If the Arab nations unarmed then Israel would be all over them.

 

[mrkun]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: mrkun
What I was trying to address is Amused's comment that Israel's army is the best in the world, which I think is unfounded.

Then you are utterly ignorant of Israel's history.

And not the "best in the world" period. The best "man for man."

I'm talking about now, not the past. What "man for man" comes down to is that with an equal number of troops, Israel's army would be superior to every other army in the world. Please back up that statement for the present; I don't care about 30-50 years ago.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: zoiks

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: DarkThinker

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: mrkun

Originally posted by: rdubbz420

Originally posted by: mrkun

Originally posted by: Amused
Well, for the military buff, Israel's army is awesome. It is, man for man, the best in the world. It's sad they are forced to be that way, but one can still admire it.

Umm, they couldn't even beat Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon?

Depends on what you consider a win? I know there were allot more dead Hezbollah than Israelis. Yes Israel didn?t complete objectives, but no doubt I would rather have to fight on the Israeli side. They had way less casualties.

Yeah, but I mean they were just fighting guerrillas. After that performance do you really think they're that much better than the armies of any other Western nation? Rather, if it had been the US or UK army in their situation, do you think they would've done worse?

I don't really want to get into this argument, but "just" fighting guerrillas is alot more difficult fighting an organized army, especially if you are trying to minimize civillian casulties.

Hey everyone, I am just passing by this thread and I just had the urge to crap all over the highlighted part before I go.

k thnx bai!

<----- Eye Witness

When was the last time Israel (or any nation) carpet bombed an entire city?

I thought not.

He said minimize, not completely stop. If you want to keep your soldiers in and among civilians and use them as shields you have to expect some civilian casualties.

Israel went too far during their war with Lebanon.

Why does this happen? When you are behind a desk and all you care about are your political ratings, you will give the order to do whatever necessary to win the war. You don't care about who dies on the other side. You care about your chances of winning an election or staying popular.

If the most powerful nations of the world started to elect some civilized individuals then maybe none of this brutality would happen in the first place.
Yes, my post is a direct attack at the PM of Israel.

Yes, of course because it's not as if Israel is surrounded by much bigger and more powerful nations who have been bent on it's utter and total destruction for 60+ years. Nope.

:roll:

If the Arab nations disarmed there would be peace. If Israel disarmed there would be no more Israel.

BS. If the Arab nations unarmed then Israel would be all over them.

Pure bullsh!t. Israel HAS been all over the Arab nations many times in response to their aggression, and could have increased their size by a factor of 100 had they not retreated after victory. Why don't you go look up the 1967 war for starters.

It simply amazes me how anyone with even a modicum of historical knowledge of the region could think of Israel as the aggressor.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: mrkun

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: mrkun
What I was trying to address is Amused's comment that Israel's army is the best in the world, which I think is unfounded.

Then you are utterly ignorant of Israel's history.

And not the "best in the world" period. The best "man for man."

I'm talking about now, not the past. What "man for man" comes down to is that with an equal number of troops, Israel's army would be superior to every other army in the world. Please back up that statement for the present; I don't care about 30-50 years ago.

Wow. I'll tell you what, why not go get educated and get back to me.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: DarkThinker

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: mrkun

Originally posted by: rdubbz420

Originally posted by: mrkun

Originally posted by: Amused
Well, for the military buff, Israel's army is awesome. It is, man for man, the best in the world. It's sad they are forced to be that way, but one can still admire it.

Umm, they couldn't even beat Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon?

Depends on what you consider a win? I know there were allot more dead Hezbollah than Israelis. Yes Israel didn?t complete objectives, but no doubt I would rather have to fight on the Israeli side. They had way less casualties.

Yeah, but I mean they were just fighting guerrillas. After that performance do you really think they're that much better than the armies of any other Western nation? Rather, if it had been the US or UK army in their situation, do you think they would've done worse?

I don't really want to get into this argument, but "just" fighting guerrillas is alot more difficult fighting an organized army, especially if you are trying to minimize civillian casulties.

Hey everyone, I am just passing by this thread and I just had the urge to crap all over the highlighted part before I go.

k thnx bai!

<----- Eye Witness

When was the last time Israel (or any nation) carpet bombed an entire city?

I thought not.

He said minimize, not completely stop. If you want to keep your soldiers in and among civilians and use them as shields you have to expect some civilian casualties.

Israel went too far during their war with Lebanon.

Why does this happen? When you are behind a desk and all you care about are your political ratings, you will give the order to do whatever necessary to win the war. You don't care about who dies on the other side. You care about your chances of winning an election or staying popular.

If the most powerful nations of the world started to elect some civilized individuals then maybe none of this brutality would happen in the first place.
Yes, my post is a direct attack at the PM of Israel.

Yes, of course because it's not as if Israel is surrounded by much bigger and more powerful nations who have been bent on it's utter and total destruction for 60+ years. Nope.

:roll:

If the Arab nations disarmed there would be peace. If Israel disarmed there would be no more Israel.

oh please.
Israel is not surrounded by anyone more powerful than them

Neither is anyone around them trying to go to war with Israel.

You make it sound as if the Arabs are out to destroy Israel.
If that was the case they could easily stack up on Russian military tech and build nuclear plants. Nobody will stop them. Saudi Arabia/UAE/Kuwait/Qatar are loaded with surplus $

Every Arab nation surrounding Israel buys U.S tech that is downgraded. They know it is downgraded. They could easily turn to Russian or European tech. They usually don't.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: DarkThinker

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: mrkun

Originally posted by: rdubbz420

Originally posted by: mrkun

Originally posted by: Amused
Well, for the military buff, Israel's army is awesome. It is, man for man, the best in the world. It's sad they are forced to be that way, but one can still admire it.

Umm, they couldn't even beat Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon?

Depends on what you consider a win? I know there were allot more dead Hezbollah than Israelis. Yes Israel didn?t complete objectives, but no doubt I would rather have to fight on the Israeli side. They had way less casualties.

Yeah, but I mean they were just fighting guerrillas. After that performance do you really think they're that much better than the armies of any other Western nation? Rather, if it had been the US or UK army in their situation, do you think they would've done worse?

I don't really want to get into this argument, but "just" fighting guerrillas is alot more difficult fighting an organized army, especially if you are trying to minimize civillian casulties.

Hey everyone, I am just passing by this thread and I just had the urge to crap all over the highlighted part before I go.

k thnx bai!

<----- Eye Witness

When was the last time Israel (or any nation) carpet bombed an entire city?

I thought not.

He said minimize, not completely stop. If you want to keep your soldiers in and among civilians and use them as shields you have to expect some civilian casualties.

Israel went too far during their war with Lebanon.

Why does this happen? When you are behind a desk and all you care about are your political ratings, you will give the order to do whatever necessary to win the war. You don't care about who dies on the other side. You care about your chances of winning an election or staying popular.

If the most powerful nations of the world started to elect some civilized individuals then maybe none of this brutality would happen in the first place.
Yes, my post is a direct attack at the PM of Israel.

Yes, of course because it's not as if Israel is surrounded by much bigger and more powerful nations who have been bent on it's utter and total destruction for 60+ years. Nope.

:roll:

If the Arab nations disarmed there would be peace. If Israel disarmed there would be no more Israel.

oh please.
Israel is not surrounded by anyone more powerful than them

Neither is anyone around them trying to go to war with Israel.

You make it sound as if the Arabs are out to destroy Israel.
If that was the case they could easily stack up on Russian military tech and build nuclear plants. Nobody will stop them. Saudi Arabia/UAE/Kuwait/Qatar are loaded with surplus $

Yeah, because 1948 and 1967 never happened, right? The War of Attrition never happened, right? EVERY one of Israel's neighbors has attacked them, a few times almost all at once. Israel owned them all every time.

What the fsck are they teaching in schools these days??? Because it's obvious they aren't teaching history.

 

[mrkun]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: mrkun

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: mrkun
What I was trying to address is Amused's comment that Israel's army is the best in the world, which I think is unfounded.

Then you are utterly ignorant of Israel's history.

And not the "best in the world" period. The best "man for man."

I'm talking about now, not the past. What "man for man" comes down to is that with an equal number of troops, Israel's army would be superior to every other army in the world. Please back up that statement for the present; I don't care about 30-50 years ago.

Wow. I'll tell you what, why not go get educated and get back to me.

That's a wonderful argument, thank you.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: mrkun

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: mrkun

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: mrkun
What I was trying to address is Amused's comment that Israel's army is the best in the world, which I think is unfounded.

Then you are utterly ignorant of Israel's history.

And not the "best in the world" period. The best "man for man."

I'm talking about now, not the past. What "man for man" comes down to is that with an equal number of troops, Israel's army would be superior to every other army in the world. Please back up that statement for the present; I don't care about 30-50 years ago.

Wow. I'll tell you what, why not go get educated and get back to me.

That's a wonderful argument, thank you.

It would take pages and days for me to explain to you why Israel's army is the most respected for it's size. Why not educate yourself instead of expecting me to do it for you?

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: Turin39789
ooh boy a militarized culture!

Think Switzerland, but not neutral.

 

[bob4432]

in the op - pic of the chicks - 1 & 3 :thumbsup:

to bad the op didn't take them, hahaha