Mid east

[scout 0]

ěăářé âĺřîé äáéÄçĺÄ, ářâĺúé äĺăä áëę ůŕéůř ôéâĺňé éřé áůÄçéí, ĺáäí äôéâĺň ůáĺ đäřâ áÄňĺú đćéř éĺĺđé áëáéů îňěä ŕăĺîéí. äâĺřîéí ńéřáĺ Ä›Ã´Å™Ä Ã¤Å•Ã­ ářâĺúé äĺăä âí áîňĺřáĺú áôéâĺňé äúŕáăĺú ůáéöňä äćřĺň äöáŕéú ůě äôúç, âăĺăé çěěé Å•Ä› ŕ÷öä.

ěăářé âĺřîé äáéÄçĺÄ, ářâĺúé âí ÷ůř áç÷éřúĺ ŕú éĺ"Å™ äřůĺú äôěńÄéđéú, éŕńř ňřôŕú, Ä›Ã®Ã©Ã®ÄºÄ Ã´ÅˆÃ©Ä›Ã© úđćéí ůáéöňĺ ôéâĺňéí đâă éůřŕěéí. äĺŕ ńéôř ůëîćë"Ä› äôúç äéä ňěéĺ ěăŕĺâ ěńéĺň ëńôé ěçářé äôúç, ěöĺřę řëéůú ŕîöňé ěçéîä ĺáéöĺň äôňéěĺú äöáŕéú. ëě ôňéě ůáé÷ů ńéĺň, äéä çééá ěîěŕ á÷ůä îôĺřÄú; ářâĺúé äéä çĺúí ňěéä ĺîĺńéó ŕú äîěöúĺ ĺîňáéř ŕú äá÷ůä ěňřôŕú. ářâĺúé Ã¶Ã©Ã©Ä Ã«Ã© ëě ńëĺí – ĺěĺ ä÷ÄÄ Ã¡Ã©ÄºÃºÅ™ – ăřů ŕú ŕéůĺřĺ ůě ňřôŕú ňöîĺ. ěŕçř ŕéůĺř ůě ňřôŕú äéä îĺňář äëńó, áäĺřŕúĺ ůě îćëéř äĺňă äîřëćé ůě äôúç, çëí áěňŕĺĺé.

áîňřëú äáéÄÃ§ÄºÄ Ã®Ã¶Ã©Ã©Ä‘Ã©Ã­ ëé âí ňöĺřéí áëéřéí đĺńôéí, ůäéĺ ô÷ĺăéĺ ůě ářâĺúé, äôěéěĺ ŕĺúĺ áîňĺřáĺú áôéâĺňéí. äîăĺář, Ã¡Ã©Ä Ã¤Ã©ÃºÅ™, áđŕńř ňĺĺéń, řŕů äćřĺň äöáŕéú ůě äôúç áůĺîřĺÄ, ůäĺăä áŕçřéĺú ěôéâĺňé úĺôú řáéí áéůřŕě; áŕçîă ářâĺúé, ňĺćřĺ äŕéůé ůě Ã®Å™ÄºÄºÅ•Ä Ã¡Å™Ã¢ÄºÃºÃ©, ůäĺăä ëé ůéěç Ã¡Å•ÄºÃ´Ä Å•Ã©Å¯Ã© îúŕáăéí ěéůřŕě; ĺáđŕńř ŕáĺ çîéă, îáëéřé âăĺăé çěěé Å•Ä› ŕ÷öä, ůäéä îňĺřá áôéâĺňéí řáéí.

âĺřîé äáéÄÃ§ÄºÄ Å•ÄºÃ®Å™Ã©Ã­ ëé áç÷éřúĺ ůě ŕáĺ çîéă äĺŕ îńř âí ůîçńđé ëĺç 17 ůéîůĺ Ä›Å•Ã§Å„ÄºÄ Ã®Äňđé çáěä ůůéîůĺ ěôéâĺňéí. ôňéěéí đĺńôéí ůäéĺ ëôĺôéí ěŕáĺ çîéă ńéôřĺ ůŕđůé ëĺç 17 ňń÷ĺ áäëđú îÄňđéí Ã¡Å•ÄºÃ´Ä Ã·Ã¡ÄºÅˆ ĺńéô÷ĺ ŕĺúí ěôňéěé äôúç ěöĺřę ôéâĺňéí.

this long pile of sh!t is, in short, an admission by Maruan Barghouti, of the sponsoring terrorism by Arafat and his factions.

[Longinius 1]

"although some of you and most of the pals do the best to show that we are, to the point of accusing of massacre and executions although no evidence were supplied."

Well, your guys are not exactly helping in killing rumors since UN observers are STILL not allowed access.

[Oligo 1]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (scout @ May 02 2002,20:07)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">point is, that the ppl that im among them, that ARE the IDF, that for couple of weeks are soldiers, that are facing difficult situations there, try to keep our humanity, not for you and not for the pals, although they deserve it one way or the other, but for us, so we could come back whole.

this job is walking between the drops, on one hand, to do what i can to keep my men, and my ppl safe, and on the other not to humiliate the population. and i know that we do a quite good job at this,and watching any other army in the world at it, i know we do it better.<span id='postcolor'>

The difference between your army and most of the other armies in the world is that you did a hostile takeover of land, which you now occupy, whereas most of the other armies are not occupying anything. That's why the other armies haven't taken casualties for a long time, whereas you take them all the time. That's also the reason why IDF is taking flak from the international community, people don't like aggression, you know.

Also, the yanks like you so much, because they do the same crap themselves. Similarity promotes friendship.

[Longinius 1]

"Also, the yanks like you so much, because they do the same crap themselves. Similarity promotes friendship."

That and strong jewish influence in lobbyist circles.

[Major Fubar 0]

And the fact Israel is USAs "foot in the door" in the middle east.

Oligo, you hit the nail right on the head about the occupation, although some people refuse to acknowledge that it is a hostile occupation.

[Oligo 1]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Major Fubar @ May 03 2002,10:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Oligo, you hit the nail right on the head about the occupation, although some people refuse to acknowledge that it is a hostile occupation.<span id='postcolor'>

There are a few telltale signs that point out that it is an occupation:

-The pals are resisting with an organized force (using dubious tactics). Israelis call the organized force terrorists like the occupiers have always done in history.

-The pals are not israeli citizens and thus cannot affect their plight with democratic voting means affecting the SUPREME authority of their land. They are effectively 'rightless' when it comes to the supreme decisions. This happens when there is a hostile occupation.

-You may debate semantics, but just look at what a typical IDF soldier is facing. You patrol in an area where everybody (men, women, children) hates you and is out to kill you. A defending army normally enjoys the support of the civvie population, whereas an occupying army faces hostility from the people they are controlling.

[IsthatyouJohnWayne 0]

But the fact is whatever the history....NOW -Even is Israel completly retreated to 1960-whatever borders and settlers withdrew completly out of west bank etc

-then there would STILL be suicide bombings and mortar/rocket attacks against Israel which they would HAVE to respond to

cetainly the bombers would have somewhat less support than right now (when they have almost 100% support)

but theyde still have widespread support for 'revenge' acts against the Israelies even with a full Palestinian state

Israeli incursions almost certainly have aggrevated the situation ,and Israel hasnt made it easy for itself in the World community(not that they care   )

but right now, i dont see what other choice they have,

Oligo- it might sound childish but

once you start the escalation of violence and occupation

, you cant simply stop , because the other side will continue

to bomb and kill

The I. government has to respond to that,

so what do you propose they do? i havent heard a single convincing solution from those who criticise Israel-

Yes i think the IDF went somewhat too far in the wholesale destruction of Palestinian property , but as i understand -only after the 13 IDF people were killed by a booby trapped house.

I also think you and much European media go overboard in your criticism of the IDF.

They are acting as a sovereign state in the best way they know how to protect their citizens from attack

(even if from those incensed by Jewish settlers or other acts regarded as provocations)

come back when your country is suffereing a homicidal mombing campaign.

YES palestinians need more rights and to be treated like human beings

But the Israelies are up against people who will stop at nothing to kill them (the pali.extremists)

For the most part the same is not true for Palestinians

(the IDF)

i dont think everyone who took up a gun against the Israelies were necessarily terrorists (just defending their homes)

which is very sad

but the fact is you have no better way of stopping the bombings against Israeli civilians.

[IsthatyouJohnWayne 0]

prove me wrong-

and lets see if we can get this to 100 pages!

is suggest reading this in relation to Jenin, i think it helps put things into perspective

http://slate.msn.com/default.aspx?id=2065250

[Guest]

I think what people overlook is that the PLO's goal is not just a state for the pals. It is the complete destruction of the state of Israel. This is not my interpretation, but it is their official mission statement. The fact that Israel kills more pals then the other way around is just a question of capabilities.

I am not defending the current operations of the IDF, but I think people should have in mind that the ideology behind PLO's actions are much worse then the ones behind IDF's. The pals simply don't have the capabilities to kill as many jews as they would like, but that doesn't make them saints.

[scout 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Oligo @ May 03 2002,10:07)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">[The difference between your army and most of the other armies in the world is that you did a hostile takeover of land, which you now occupy, whereas most of the other armies are not occupying anything. That's why the other armies haven't taken casualties for a long time, whereas you take them all the time. That's also the reason why IDF is taking flak from the international community, people don't like aggression, you know.

Also, the yanks like you so much, because they do the same crap themselves. Similarity promotes friendship.<span id='postcolor'>

oh my! why is then the pals refused the deal in camp-david? was it becuase they had other plans? maybe they wanted more, like Haifa, Akko, Jaffa, and Ashdod? can it be?

no its just science fiction right? wrong! thats EXACTLY why Arafat rejected this deal. he's counting upon the "enlightened" world comunity to force us to accept these terms, after he'll ofcourse make us look as bad as possible.

if there was a real desire on the other side to finish this conflict it would've end in 2000. and the "Al-Aqsa intifada" is a hoax, a strategic decision done by the pals in order to forcce an agreement on us. they thought we would crack. theywere wrong and lost control.

BTW. the reason Israel as whole is getting flak isnt because of this "hostile take-over" its because we're easy to snipe at. i didnt see 10% of this attention on other countries that are engaged on other territories:like Russia, or maybe China or maybe the "enlightened" Syria? or the human rights memebers Libya? Iran? Iraq?

not a wisper. so maybe there is other reason we getting flak? hmmm.....probably.

and dont "other situation" me. the other situation is that they did what the hell they wanted, and if someone peeped, they just growled it off.

if you would treat everyone the same, i would accept. otherwise, its just hypocracy.

[scout 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Oligo @ May 03 2002,10:07)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Also, the yanks like you so much, because they do the same crap themselves. Similarity promotes friendship.<span id='postcolor'>

BTW. since when you turned into a psychologist?

[Benze 0]

[InqWiper 0]

Thats stupid Benze, the Israel soldiers arent exaclty heroes...now Im gonna start reading this thread from the start, the longest one i've ever seen.

[scout 0]

well inqwiper - u'll have to take some vacation for that!

[E6Hotel 0]

Oligo:

“The difference between your army and most of the other armies in the world is that you did a hostile takeover of land, which you now occupy, whereas most of the other armies are not occupying anything. That's why the other armies haven't taken casualties for a long time, whereas you take them all the time. That's also the reason why IDF is taking flak from the international community, people don't like aggression, you know.

Also, the yanks like you so much, because they do the same crap themselves. Similarity promotes friendship.â€

There’s a world of difference between being aggressive when attacked and being an aggressor.  Or are you forgetting that little incident in ’67 that led to the occupation in the first place?  THAT was aggression.  For the sake of argument, let’s say that Israel agrees to withdraw to the pre-’67 border.  Do you really believe that the attacks would stop?  If anything, it would be interpreted as a display of weakness by the surrounding countries, who’d try to get froggy again.  

The reason we “yanks†support Israel is that they are a democratic nation completely surrounded by enemies that want to wipe them off the face of the earth.  Are “yanks†aggressive?  Damn straight we are, when provoked -- but I’d like you to tell me about any conflicts we’ve initiated.

Benze:  

PLO scumbags don’t rate to be called “soldiers.† Terrorists = punks with machine guns.

Semper Fi

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (E6Hotel @ May 04 2002,01:46)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The reason we “yanks†support Israel is that they are a democratic nation completely surrounded by enemies that want to wipe them off the face of the earth.  Are “yanks†aggressive?  Damn straight we are, when provoked -- but I’d like you to tell me about any conflicts we’ve initiated.<span id='postcolor'>

That is a really naÄf view. The policy of the United States and other stable countries in the world is governed by realpolitik. The notion that USA supports Israel because they are the good guys is really not realistic. USA has a great interest in Israel because it gives them an ally in the Mid East. Why do they need an ally? Oil of course. It has always been about economical and political interests. There are exceptions due to the fact that the polititians sometimes must follow popular and media opinions. The American people are not at all that interested in Israel. There is no humanitarian disaster on the Jewish part. Sure, suicide bombings are nasty, but in reallity they don't kill many people. The Palestinans suffer much more civilan casulties then the Israeli. There is no popular opinion in the world that Israel needs to be saved.

The split in European policy vs. US policy is a prime example of that this is a question of national interests.

[scout 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ May 04 2002,03:38)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The notion that USA supports Israel because they are the good guys is really not realistic. USA has a great interest in Israel because it gives them an ally in the Mid East. Why do they need an ally? Oil of course. It has always been about economical and political interests. There are exceptions due to the fact that the polititians sometimes must follow popular and media opinions. The American people are not at all that interested in Israel. There is no humanitarian disaster on the Jewish part. Sure, suicide bombings are nasty, but in reallity they don't kill many people. The Palestinans suffer much more civilan casulties then the Israeli. There is no popular opinion in the world that Israel needs to be saved.

The split in European policy vs. US policy is a prime example of that this is a question of national interests.<span id='postcolor'>

Oil? huh! think again! israel doesnt have a gram of oil in its ground. if anything the backing the US is giving israel is putting them in danger of an oil embargo. remember the oil boycott in '74?

the pals didnt suffer more civilian casualties then israel. unless u count every gun bearer as a civilian.

since the Oslo agreement there were 778 and more then 7500 israeli civilians killed by terrorists, and counting. the reason is simple: the pals target civvies, the IDF doesnt.

in the question of humanitarian disaster here is an interesting figure: from about 750000 refugees in gaza two thirds are from gazan origin!

the humanitarian situation is derived directly from the decision to use refugee camps and populated areas as bases. when you decide to fight your fight in a city, u r willingly sacrifice the population and its property. the fact that there were booby-traped houses just strengthen it.

"Sure, suicide bombings are nasty, but in reallity they don't kill many people."

this is killer number one. the fact that 80% of the attacks are stopped before execution, or that suicide bombers often blow themselves prematurly doesnt point to a thing.

if we are talking 100% success it would achieve more then 4000 ppl dead!

"There is no popular opinion in the world that Israel needs to be saved."

nor was it in the independance war in '48 or the Yom-Kippur in '73 for that matter, it only shows that the world doesnt give a shit.

[scout 0]

some points:

you might find some interesting thing in here......oh sorry i forgot to mention: FALSE ISRAELI PROPOGANDA

[E6Hotel 0]

Denoir:

One person’s naivete is another’s idealism, and there are plenty of us here that do care.  The “ally for oil†argument doesn’t hold up, either.  How exactly does our supporting Israel help our oil situation?  It would be much easier, though dishonorable, for us to cut off Israel – after all, we could simply park the Stennis and the Carl Vinson in the Persian Gulf.  That would give us all the leverage we’d need.  I’d much rather pay Mexico or Russia higher prices for oil that to see us betray an ally.  And I feel confident that after the hydrogen fuel cell (eventually) renders the Middle East strategically irrelevant to the West, we’ll still be supporting Israel.  Obviously, we’ll just have to wait and see.  

“It has always been about economical and political interests. There are exceptions due to the fact that the polititians sometimes must follow popular and media opinions.† 

Well, which is it?  Saying that we only act in our own interests is a bit cynical; even a brief look at recent history will disprove that.

Semper Fi

[second_draw 0]

Why does US support Israel? Not that i object to it but it seems to me that it is not very clear. Is the US using this relationship as a way of the US making a stance against terrorism & commies? Was it a lucky pick that Israel has Us might behind them? It surely isn't to do with oil prices (imo, the sooner the middle east runs out of fuel the better, it will stop them from becoming more egotistic). I can only think of israel as a military stratetigic partner? At least the arabs will think twice before attacking israel with the US behind them.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (E6Hotel @ May 04 2002,03:34)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">One person’s naivete is another’s idealism, and there are plenty of us here that do care. The “ally for oil†argument doesn’t hold up, either. How exactly does our supporting Israel help our oil situation? It would be much easier, though dishonorable, for us to cut off Israel – after all, we could simply park the Stennis and the Carl Vinson in the Persian Gulf. <span id='postcolor'>

Ok, this is to scout also. Israel provides a strategic counterpoint to the arab countries. The west has been scared shitless that the arabs might want to sell oil at market prices, since the Suez war in 1956. Israel can provide bases. Parking a carrier in the Gulf just doesn't do it. You need ground troops to secure the oilfields. If USA looses it support from Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries, Israel remains the only point of entry.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I’d much rather pay Mexico or Russia higher prices for oil that to see us betray an ally.<span id='postcolor'>

LMAO. No you wouldn't. Well, perhaps you personally would, but no country, including the US would do that.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">“It has always been about economical and political interests. There are exceptions due to the fact that the polititians sometimes must follow popular and media opinions.â€

Well, which is it? Saying that we only act in our own interests is a bit cynical; even a brief look at recent history will disprove that.<span id='postcolor'>

Lets see, major US operations:

Afganistan: Pure US interests. You got attacked and fought back.

Yugoslavia: US came in very, very, very late in the conflict, after the media pressure became to big.

Gulf War: Can you say oil? O*I*L. Don't try any protecting the people of Kuwait bs. There are 10x worse dictatures in the world that the US doesn't give a shit about. Invasions too. Mass killings too. Shall I say Rowanda?

Vietnam: Political cold war hysteria.

Korea: Political cold war hysteria.

As the famous Prussian starategic theorist Carl von Clausewitz said in his book "Vom Kriege" (1832):

War is an extension of politics by other means.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">"Sure, suicide bombings are nasty, but in reallity they don't kill many people."

this is killer number one. the fact that 80% of the attacks are stopped before execution, or that suicide bombers often blow themselves prematurly doesnt point to a thing.

if we are talking 100% success it would achieve more then 4000 ppl dead! <span id='postcolor'>

But there isn't a 100% success rate. So you can't count that in any way. So you say that overall, through Israels history 800 persons have been killed by suicide bombers. That is no significant number, as horrible as it might sound. What I mean is that it doesnt pose any threat to the existence of Israel. Suicide bombings are psychologicaly nasty, but they don't do any 'real' damage to the country.

[scout 0]

its not since israel had risen. that figure is about 8000 ppl now.

its since 1993. 440 dead and 2500 wounded since sep. 2000.

would you say thats acceptable losses? that you would accept these kind of figures?

yes there is real damage!

the damage is economical first and thats now way to live.

to get a pat down when you enter malls, to carry arms anywhere i go. would you agree to live like that?

you might say that its a result of occupation. then ill tell you that prior '67, it was considered dengarous to leave home after dark! there were attacks and murders nightly.

so, the essence of terrorism is disruption of regular life. and thats the danger. BTW would you come to israel in the last 18 months for a vacation?

another matter: here is a "funeral". seems that the pals have great difficulty to prove massacre no?

BBC surprisingly.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (scout @ May 04 2002,04:56)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">its not since israel had risen. that figure is about 8000 ppl now.

its since 1993. 440 dead and 2500 wounded since sep. 2000.

would you say thats acceptable losses? that you would accept these kind of figures?<span id='postcolor'>

More people are killed in car accidents in a year. What I however was trying to say is that the bombings pose no strategic threat to Israel directly. I am not saying that Israel should accept them. The same thing was with the WTC attack.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">yes there is real damage!

the damage is economical first and thats now way to live.

to get a pat down when you enter malls, to carry arms anywhere i go. would you agree to live like that?

<span id='postcolor'>

No I wouldn't, but I still say that the bombings pose no existential threat to Israel.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">BTW would you come to israel in the last 18 months for a vacation?

<span id='postcolor'>

No, I probably wouldn't.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">so, the essence of terrorism is disruption of regular life. and thats the danger.<span id='postcolor'>

Actually, I would say that it is the fear of disruption of regular life. The point with terrorism is the fear.

[scout 0]

the stratrgic threat is in:

1. the need for EVERY buissness to post armed security guards.

2. for larger military spendings, and more time reservists (like me) have to spend yearly.

3. less tourism

4. less trade because ppl dont go out anymore.

in israel that figure had exceeded car accidents, and again, car accidents are more isolated and more important are "random" events. suicide bombings are specific.

BTW. the main threat is that it keeps both sides from reaching some kind of settlement