[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
Great points by both of you, but bear in mind hatred of the U.S. and this president runs so high in the Middle East right now that any U.S. initiatives, no matter how well-intentioned, may simply be spurned or ignored by the majority of Arabs.[/quote]
I think that’s a very valid point, so perhaps those initiatives should be introduced through another party. The UN, or a middle-eastern ally of ours.
Further on that theme, these articles show a juxtaposition that is not an ethnic divide but a religious one: Shia/Sunni, with Sunnis supporting at least the result of a weakening of Shia terrorists:
[quote]vroom wrote:
Angry people do not an organized and armed terrorist organization make. By this I mean that “wiping out” Hezbollah in terms of removing weapons and leadership can leave behind lots of unhappy people.
However, if they are less organized and the Lebanese government can thus exert authority over them, the situation is much changed.
[/quote]
I don’t think Israel can wipe out Hezbollah from a distance.
I’m not even sure they could do it if they controlled Lebanon.
So I don’t see any benefits in pounding Lebanon to rubble.
It just proves the terrorist’s thesis that Israel is evil thus generating more support for Hezbollah.
I never said that. I said that they should try something else because the way they are defending themselves is NOT working.
I used to live near a pretty bad neighborhood. I’ve seen five or six little thugs just itching to pick a fight with my kid brother. He always got out of it without a scratch by keeping his cool and talking his way out of it.
Both Spain and Great Britain have had problems with terrorist organisations.
Those problems seem to be pretty much over or very much reduced.
Maybe Israel should look in that direction and see how it was done.
[quote]k.elkouhen wrote:
I don’t think Israel can wipe out Hezbollah from a distance.
I’m not even sure they could do it if they controlled Lebanon.
So I don’t see any benefits in pounding Lebanon to rubble.[/quote]
Pounding it to rubble? Are you dreaming? If they were indiscriminately pounding it into rubble we’d all have seen it for ourselves.
My god. Don’t you understand the concept of war at all? The Israeli, as the US do, make every effort to avoid collateral damage.
You can’t ask for more than that. Of course, that doesn’t stop the weaker side from crying about how much the “populace” is suffering. If the populace is suffering it is because they have allowed terrorism to set up roots in their communities.
No matter how much of a peacenik you may be, you can’t honestly suggest that Israel should sit there and allow Hezbollah to bomb it’s civilians, can you?
Bullshit.
You don’t know that. They’ve been trying something else for a long time. This has just started. It is way too early to decide this isn’t working.
So what? You think terrorist groups are going to sit around and talk to you? There are limits to how much you can let people push you around. To relate this to childhood thugs is just lunacy.
These are serious people, with weapons, killing Israeli civilians whenever they can, and you suggest that you sit down and sing kumba-ya with them they will suddenly decide they like you?
[quote]Both Spain and Great Britain have had problems with terrorist organisations.
Those problems seem to be pretty much over or very much reduced.
Maybe Israel should look in that direction and see how it was done.[/quote]
First, the problems are not over. Spain and Britain have the same troubles we have in Canada and the USA. There are extremists that would love to bomb our cities.
I don’t think you get the concept of an extremist do you? They don’t care what you do. What you do can possibly affect the ability of the extremists to recruit new members, but they already control the education and media, so it doesn’t really matter what you do.
You need to wake up and realize that fanaticism or evil exists. You can’t just appease people and let them kill your citizens or otherwise rape you in the hopes that they won’t do so very often.
Shit, I’m a liberal, even I get this. What the heck is your leaning?
[quote]vroom wrote:
[…]
Are you dreaming? […]
My god. […]
No matter how much of a peacenik you may be […]
Bullshit. […]
To relate this to childhood thugs is just lunacy […]
You suggest that you sit down and sing kumba-ya with them […]
I don’t think you get the concept of an extremist do you? […]
You need to wake up and realize that fanaticism or evil exists. […]
Shit, I’m a liberal, even I get this. What the heck is your leaning?
[/quote]
We’re just talking and we don’t have any kind of influence on what’s happening over there.
The difference between us, is that I don’t think Israel is on the right track for peace.
I also don’t think Israel is completely innocent. It takes two to tango. When your enemies are as evil as Hamas or Hezbollah you have some sort of responsability.
What’s ironic is that we both want peace.
That means we’re on the same side, so just cool down.
[quote]k.elkouhen wrote:
We’re just talking and we don’t have any kind of influence on what’s happening over there.
The difference between us, is that I don’t think Israel is on the right track for peace.
I also don’t think Israel is completely innocent. It takes two to tango. When your enemies are as evil as Hamas or Hezbollah you have some sort of responsability.[/quote]
Let me ask you a question, to put the terrorist issue to light. If you came home from work and found someone had murdered your children and was raping your wife… would you A) attempt to negotiate or B) kill the bastard?
Terrorists do incredibly bad things to people.
[quote]What’s ironic is that we both want peace.
That means we’re on the same side, so just cool down.[/quote]
I’m not sure were on the same side at all, but what fun would it be if we had nothing to argue about?
Look, you need to recognize that some people are not exactly rational. When they have been raised from childhood to live for the purpose of serving God by killing their enemies, it is rather difficult to invite them in for tea and crumpets and convince them of the error of their ways.
I dislike what appears to be excuses being made for terrorist actions. Those actions cross some important lines and it is important for terrorists to know that they can never achieve their ends through those means.
[quote]vroom wrote:
k.elkouhen wrote:
We’re just talking and we don’t have any kind of influence on what’s happening over there.
The difference between us, is that I don’t think Israel is on the right track for peace.
I also don’t think Israel is completely innocent. It takes two to tango. When your enemies are as evil as Hamas or Hezbollah you have some sort of responsability.
Let me ask you a question, to put the terrorist issue to light. If you came home from work and found someone had murdered your children and was raping your wife… would you A) attempt to negotiate or B) kill the bastard?
Terrorists do incredibly bad things to people.
[/quote]
C) Catch the bastard and call the police.
[quote]
What’s ironic is that we both want peace.
That means we’re on the same side, so just cool down.
I’m not sure were on the same side at all, but what fun would it be if we had nothing to argue about?
Look, you need to recognize that some people are not exactly rational. When they have been raised from childhood to live for the purpose of serving God by killing their enemies, it is rather difficult to invite them in for tea and crumpets and convince them of the error of their ways.
I dislike what appears to be excuses being made for terrorist actions. [/quote]
Vroom, this is the third time in maybe four or five posts that you have put words into my mouth.
I HATE terrorists.
I am not making any excuses for terrorists or their actions.
What I AM saying is that Israel shares responsabilty. If it had managed the situation differently, terrorism wouldn’t have such a strong foothold in Lebanon, Gaza and the West Bank.
Guess what? If I took the decisions in Israel I would probably have done it the same way.
But Israel has been playing hardball since it’s inception and it’s not working.
It’s just making it harder to find a solution.
Why do you think Hamas was elected ?
[quote]k.elkouhen wrote:
C) Catch the bastard and call the police.[/quote]
LOL. That isn’t always an option that the other party will leave you. That’s the part you pretend not to understand.
[quote]Vroom, this is the third time in maybe four or five posts that you have put words into my mouth.
I HATE terrorists.
I am not making any excuses for terrorists or their actions.[/quote]
Maybe you should look at your statements a little closer then.
[quote]What I AM saying is that Israel shares responsabilty. If it had managed the situation differently, terrorism wouldn’t have such a strong foothold in Lebanon, Gaza and the West Bank.
Guess what? If I took the decisions in Israel I would probably have done it the same way.[/quote]
The problem is that Israel was not at fault for the creation of itself. As soon as it was carved out of the region it was surrounded by hatred, before it even took a single action.
It doesn’t matter. In the last, what, five or six years, they pulled out of occupied territories and were working for peace. It got them nowhere. Just like option C above being unavailable due to the perpetrator, the external parties are not allowing Israel to make some potential choices.
The alternative is to sit back and watch their citizens die. They are given option A and B, because there is no option C for them either.
[quote]It’s just making it harder to find a solution.
Why do you think Hamas was elected ? [/quote]
The solution is simple. Have the countries around Israel police themselves, so that terrorists are not launching attacks into Israel, and the situation is over.
Don’t you get it? Israel has a chunk of land that it wants to be safe in. There is no difficulty in figuring out what the solution is. However, Islamic fundamentalists don’t care what Israel does, they hate it, they want to wipe it off the map.
Israel is not being given many options… regardless of whether or not their have been mistakes in the past.
The reason Hamas was elected was because too many people have extremist views perhaps brought on by radical Islam and rampant propaganda. If they were simply willing to live their own lives and let Israel exist, then there wouldn’t be a need for strife.
You continually demonstrate a lack of understanding for the situation. Just like picking option C from the A and B scenario, you show that you don’t understand that sometimes the other party forces your hand, removes your options, and makes you pick between choices you don’t like.
When you figure that out, you’ll be able to sound less like you sympathize with the terrorists.
[quote]vroom wrote:
k.elkouhen wrote:
From the article :
4 Israeli civilians have been killed versus about a hundred in Lebanon and another hundred in Gaza.
When does it stop being collateral damage and turn into indiscriminate usage of force ?
You figure the terrorists deserve a free pass because they hide among civilians and civilians allow it?
Sure, that’s a good policy. So, you’d rather they lob the odd rocket over the border, in perpetuity, because that way only a few people would die at a time?
To answer your question, it stops being collateral damage when they aim for civilians or otherwise purposefully attempt to maximize civilian deaths.
However, because Hezbollah adherents don’t have a uniform and dogtags, whether or not the person hit is Hezbollah, it will be claimed to be a civilian for propaganda purposes.
Look, I’m a lefty and I’ve been called an “ultra-liberal”, but that doesn’t stop me from seeing that sometimes you do have to fight and subsequently kill. This is especially true when someone is trying to kill you and will use any means available and any tactics available.
Go sing kumba-ya somewhere else, it won’t fly here.[/quote]
vroom, i doubt your opinion would hold it ground if say canada was being relentlessly attacked.
the easy answer is a united middle east. under the rightfull owner of the territory, Iran. then we can have the re-birth of the glorious persian empire. that would be a fun country to deal with.
[quote]mazilla wrote:
the easy answer is a united middle east. under the rightfull owner of the territory, Iran. then we can have the re-birth of the glorious persian empire. that would be a fun country to deal with. [/quote]
WTF are you talking about?
This is the second time you have said this.
You realize Persians and Arabs are not the same thing don’t you?
It was been a few thousand years since the Persians ran the show over there.
The Arabs don’t want it to happen again.
[quote]mazilla wrote:
vroom, i doubt your opinion would hold it ground if say canada was being relentlessly attacked.
[/quote]
Are you directing your comments at the right guy?
[quote]vroom wrote:
k.elkouhen wrote:
C) Catch the bastard and call the police.
LOL.
[/quote]
I can’t believe you LOLed again.
You’ve lost this discussion too 
But for the fun, I’ll give you another chance.
Just don’t use leet speak and we’ll be fine.
Give me the benefice of doubt.
I am honestly trying to have a civilized discussion with you.
I’m not pretending to misunderstand anything you say.
55 % of the British mandate was given to 6% of the population.
Israelis knew that this was going to cause a lot of hatred and they were prepared to fight.
They chose to accept the hatred in exchange for a homeland.
Israelis are not going away.
Neither are the palestinians.
Therefore they have to find a way to live together.
All the fighting has done over the years is aggravate the situation.
You do know for example that the terrorist organisation Hezbollah was created in '82 to fight the Israeli Defense Forces who occupied southern Lebanon until the year 2000 ?
They pulled out of southern Lebanon while staying in the Chebaa farms region part of the Golan Heights.
They also pulled out of Gaza unilaterally while staying in the West Bank.
Both the West bank and the Chebaa farms are occupied territories.
At this point, Israel was obviously waiting for the Palestinian authority and the Lebanese government to dismantle Hamas and Hezbollah.
You know that for historical reasons both the Lebanese government and the palestinian autority were and are still very weak.
So, unfortunately nothing happened.
Combined with the fact that there were no ongoing negociations, I think Israel was expecting too much too soon.
I don’t see it that way.
Israelis are intelligent and have enough ressorces to find other options.
An obvious option would be for Israel to get out of the occupied territories.
Help the Palestinians develop a democratic country with some sort of economic development : schools, hospitals, work…
When people have some kind of hope, they will not resort to terrorism.
Give them some reasonable timeline and palestinians will start fighting terrorism.
Of course, Israel has a multitude of colonies in the West Bank that they are not willing to relinquish, so this option is not going to be considered, at least not in the near future.
Guess I must be some kind of doofus
[quote]
Just like picking option C from the A and B scenario, you show that you don’t understand that sometimes the other party forces your hand, removes your options, and makes you pick between choices you don’t like.
When you figure that out, you’ll be able to sound less like you sympathize with the terrorists.[/quote]
Vroom, if you knew me better, I’m pretty sure that you wouldn’t say that.
But hey this is just the Internet so you can say whatever you please.
If you knew me better you would also know that I sympathize with Ahmed and Khadija or with David and Sarah who are just in the middle of all this shit.
[quote]doogie wrote:
This is as much of a balanced look as I am willing to take:
On October 23, 1983 at 6:22 a.m., a large delivery truck drove to the Beirut International Airport where the Marine Barracks was located.
After turning onto an access road leading to the compound, the driver rushed through a barbed-wire fence, passed between two sentry posts, crashed through the gate, and slammed into the lobby of the barracks.
The driver detonated explosives with the power equal to more than 12,000 pounds of TNT. The explosion crumbled the four-story building, crushing service members to death while they were sleeping.
The terrorist attack killed 220 Marines and 21 other U.S. service members who were stationed there to help keep the peace in a nation torn by war.
It was the bloodiest day in the Corps’ history since World War II, when Marines fought to secure Iwo Jima. [/quote]
You realize that, in all likelihood, the only way we can get out of Iraq with something approaching success is by negotiating with and offering amnesty to plenty of folks who have killed plenty of American soldiers? It sucks, but that’s reality.
[quote]k.elkouhen wrote:
vroom wrote:
k.elkouhen wrote:
They are in a street fight. Are you trying to tell me that terrorists around the world are reasonable and willing to discuss things.
The terrorists are perfectly willing to take as much as you will give them, but unfortunately, peace at any price is a very bad bargain.
If you stay in a street fight for a few minutes, that’s OK. But, if you’re still in it 5 hours later then you have some sort of problem.
[/quote]
That’s a great way to put it.
Exactly. I can’t understand why the vast majority of people who post here don’t understand this fundamental concept in fighting insurgents and terrorists. I’ve posted this before, but again:
[quote]vroom wrote:
k.elkouhen wrote:
From the article :
4 Israeli civilians have been killed versus about a hundred in Lebanon and another hundred in Gaza.
When does it stop being collateral damage and turn into indiscriminate usage of force ?
You figure the terrorists deserve a free pass because they hide among civilians and civilians allow it?
Sure, that’s a good policy. So, you’d rather they lob the odd rocket over the border, in perpetuity, because that way only a few people would die at a time?
To answer your question, it stops being collateral damage when they aim for civilians or otherwise purposefully attempt to maximize civilian deaths.
However, because Hezbollah adherents don’t have a uniform and dogtags, whether or not the person hit is Hezbollah, it will be claimed to be a civilian for propaganda purposes.
Look, I’m a lefty and I’ve been called an “ultra-liberal”, but that doesn’t stop me from seeing that sometimes you do have to fight and subsequently kill. This is especially true when someone is trying to kill you and will use any means available and any tactics available.
Go sing kumba-ya somewhere else, it won’t fly here.[/quote]
yes, unfortunately i was talking to you vroom. the whole it’s ok because they are not targeting civilains on purpose thing. or that sometimes you just gotta kill. would you be saying the same things if somebody was attacking and killing innocent canadians? thats what i meant, sorry for being so vague.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
mazilla wrote:
the easy answer is a united middle east. under the rightfull owner of the territory, Iran. then we can have the re-birth of the glorious persian empire. that would be a fun country to deal with.
WTF are you talking about?
This is the second time you have said this.
You realize Persians and Arabs are not the same thing don’t you?
It was been a few thousand years since the Persians ran the show over there.
The Arabs don’t want it to happen again.[/quote]
they are all the “same thing” they are muslims, and for them thats what should really count. it will be what counts if the world keeps rallying against that religion.
it’s been slightly less than “a few thousand years” since the Persians have run things over there, look who’s calling the shots still.
the arabs don’t want what to happen again? their invasion into foriegn lands, i don’t think they would have a problem gaining land if it could be so.
so waht exactly is soo hard for you to grasp? the endless muttering of hatred has really become tiresome, your same old song and dance routine is getting old, time to change that tune zappy my boy.
Exactly. For those that don’t believe the Lebanese government has culpability in this, consider this…Lebanon is now considering moving the national army to the south to defend against an Israeli invasion (so much for the weak and helpless government excuse).
Yet they have never once moved the army into the south to stop the blatant buildup of Hezbollah forces there. They were obviously at work for a very long time (with good financing)constructing all of those new bunkers and tunnels to store their rockets…
Some posters on here have suggested that Israel doesn’t have the right to exist. You need to get a grip on your history, because if you are that brainwashed I’d say its very likely that there are baby photos of you in a suicide vest somewhere.
Jews were exiled from Israel after the Romans destroyed Jerusalem in 70 A.D. (its amazing to think that they have been able to keep their language and tradition for that long). When Palestine was part of the British Empire, Jews began legally migrating back to Israel in the late 1800s.
The Arabs in the area didn’t like these new outsiders, and in 1929 they rioted, killing 133 Jews. Because of the Holocaust and their persecution throughout history, and faced with continued friction with the Arabs, the U.S., U.N., and Great Britain agreed that Jews would never be safe from persecution unless they had their own home. They agreed to split up the territory, and Jews and Arabs alike were forced to relocate.
The Arabs rejected the offer even though they were to receive the larger share of land. Israel was immediately attacked, but for the efforts of the Arabs, Israel increased in size with land they won in the war (and subsequent wars). Now who has the “right” to the land? Well, if you take human history as a guide, it is usually the victor in battle, e.g. Americans over Mexicans, Normans over Anglo-Saxons, Romans over Celts, etc etc etc.
And Israel is totally right to keep the land they won in war because they won it after being attacked (or would have been attacked in the case of the 6 day war).
Thus, terrorism against Israel is fruitless, pointless, inhumane, and punishable because Israel has WON their land and none of the Nations around Israel that support terrorism would EVER be able to defeat Israel in battle (that is, win territory back from Israel).
I believe terrorism started at the root due to the hurt pride of an Arab people, who had a once great civilization but now would literally still be living in medieval times if Western culture did not provide them with everything they have. They have refused to advance I believe due to the extreme nature of Islam.
What makes Western nations wealthy is not race, guns, germs, or steel, but CULTURE. It is a lot easier to blame others for your problems than to look within. I hope some moderate voices in Arabia can emerge to stop all of this madness.
Listen:
I NEVER GIVE ANYONE THE “benefice of doubt.”
You have to earn the benefice of doubt. It comes from long, hard work.
When I feel the urge to give you benefice, you’ll know.
Now, let’s get serious.
JeffR
[quote]Give-me-a-large break-zilla wrote:
it’s been slightly less than “a few thousand years” since the Persians have run things over there, look who’s calling the shots still.
[/quote]
Who was the last emperor of Persia?
Darius? When was his death? 330 B.C.?
Wait, my man Darius is still calling the shots.
He’s back and he’s pissed at all Macedonian blondes.
If I were a Greek, I’d be shivering at my man Darius.
He’s had enough time in ethereal bliss to learn how to disperse a hoplite formation.
He watched his country be overrun by Macedonians, Seleucids, Romans, Parthians, Archaemaenids, Satraps, Mongols, Turks, the Britsh/French, the Shah, and now ahmadinejad.
He’s got his learn on, and now he’s going to run wild.
Beware!!!
JeffR