Anyone else think...

Chmee · Post by **Chmee** » October 7, 2003, 10:01 am

Face it, our attack on Iraq set a really bad precedence.

Israel has their own past history of preemptive strikes. Remember in 1981 Iraq was building the Osirak nuclear reactor near Baghdad. The Israelis, worried about Iraq developing Nuclear weapons sent an air strike and blew it up.

Skogen · Post by **Skogen** » October 7, 2003, 11:30 am

Kylere wrote:Fact: If Syria took Military Action against Israel in a stand alone attack, the effect would be like Mexico attacking the US.

Fact: Arafat IS a Terrorist, you do not wake up one morning and decide, "hey, no more random killing, I am gonna be a statesman now" and expect anyone but fools to believe you. Hello, McFly! He was the head of the freaking Palestine Liberation Organization, you know the PLO, as in "terrorist group, the PLO, took credit for...", learn some bloody history.

What made the PLO terrorists? Why aren't the IDF called "terrorists" as well? They are killing civilians, too...just using tanks, soldiers & laser guided missles to do it. They have just as big a history as killing innocents as the Palestinians do.
On another note, why does our country insist that the bombing of the USS Cole was a terrorist act?

Aabidano · Post by **Aabidano** » October 7, 2003, 11:40 am

Who said the PLO were terrorists? Themselves and thier acts over the last 30 years perhaps? Doesn't anyone remember the '70s and '80s?

Terrorism is defined by intent, not action.

ter·ror·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (tr-rzm)
n.
The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

ter·ror·ist ( P ) Pronunciation Key (trr-st)
n.
One that engages in acts or an act of terrorism.

Skogen · Post by **Skogen** » October 7, 2003, 11:53 am

Aabidano wrote:Who said the PLO were terrorists? Themselves and thier acts over the last 30 years perhaps? Doesn't anyone remember the '70s and '80s?

Terrorism is defined by intent, not action.
ter·ror·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (tr-rzm)
n.
The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

ter·ror·ist ( P ) Pronunciation Key (trr-st)
n.
One that engages in acts or an act of terrorism.

The Israel & the IDF fall into that definition as well.

Forthe · Post by **Forthe** » October 7, 2003, 11:54 am

Aabidano wrote:Who said the PLO were terrorists? Themselves and thier acts over the last 30 years perhaps? Doesn't anyone remember the '70s and '80s?

Terrorism is defined by intent, not action.
ter·ror·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (tr-rzm)
n.
The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

ter·ror·ist ( P ) Pronunciation Key (trr-st)
n.
One that engages in acts or an act of terrorism.

Israel regularly violates international law. Does this mean Israel is a terrorist state?

Strict definitions will bite you in the ass. You need to keep it vague so people can't pin it on you.

Skogen · Post by **Skogen** » October 7, 2003, 11:57 am

Forthe wrote:
Aabidano wrote:Who said the PLO were terrorists? Themselves and thier acts over the last 30 years perhaps? Doesn't anyone remember the '70s and '80s?

Terrorism is defined by intent, not action.
ter·ror·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (tr-rzm)
n.
The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

ter·ror·ist ( P ) Pronunciation Key (trr-st)
n.
One that engages in acts or an act of terrorism.
Israel regularly violates international law. Does this mean Israel is a terrorist state?

Strict definitions will bite you in the ass. You need to keep it vague so people can't pin it on you.

Israel a terrorist state? That depends if you feel if the founding of Isreal was "legal" or not...

vn_Tanc · Post by **vn_Tanc** » October 7, 2003, 12:00 pm

Lol wtf are you guys playing at? Are you actually trying to make a moral judgment on who is right and who is wrong in the Israel vs Arabs conflict?

Good luck. I'll check back when you reach page 15 of useless dictionary definitions and fruitless semantic hairsplitting

Skogen · Post by **Skogen** » October 7, 2003, 12:11 pm

vn_Tanc wrote:Lol wtf are you guys playing at? Are you actually trying to make a moral judgment on who is right and who is wrong in the Israel vs Arabs conflict?

Good luck. I'll check back when you reach page 15 of useless dictionary definitions and fruitless semantic hairsplitting

"Moral"? No. You is right or wrong? I've stated over and over they are both fucked.

I'm just pointing out a few things. =)

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » October 7, 2003, 12:28 pm

Face it, our attack on Iraq set a really bad precedence.

I suppose you're going to blame the legion of skanky blowjob queens that is US teen girls on Clinton too.

Ajran · Post by **Ajran** » October 7, 2003, 12:48 pm

U.S. President George W. Bush telephoned Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon Sunday to offer U.S. condolences on the Haifa suicide bombing and to discuss Israel's retaliatory strike on Syria, a Bush administration official said.

The official said the two men "agreed on the need to avoid heightening tensions in the region at this time."

and how many times have i seen THAT statement.. then that idiot Sharon does something stupid again that "heightens tensions".

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » October 7, 2003, 1:35 pm

the government of Israel is in the middle of a big 'land grab' right now with the building of this "security fence".

As a result, they know they are going to get some suicide bombing headed their way. So they are going to have the opportunities for some 'reprisals', and as such they are also going to take some liberties to get rid of some people like this guy in Syria.

The worst thing about the craziness that the government of Israel is responsible for is that at the end of the day, it is Americans who will die because of it.

we will lose people because as long as our government supports Israel NO MATTER what they do, we will NEVER be rid of people who will kill themselves to kill Americans. You cannot underestimate how closely people in the Middle East follow developments in Palestine and Israel.

anyways, sure there are some crazy extremeist Palestinian groups. And maybe Arafat has some influence with them. Maybe he doesn't. i sure dont know, but he is the elected leader of his people, and i'm not sure how we can say we are for democracy in the region when we refuse to deal with the democratically elected leader of a government.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » October 7, 2003, 3:00 pm

The problem with all of that Voro, is that at some point the U.S. is going to begin dealing with the exact same problems Israel is with the suicide bombings. I can guaranfuckingtee you that when that starts happening here on a semi-frequent basis that the Middle Eastern countries will get on their knees and pray to Allah for the day that they only had to worry about a missile strike or two from Israel. The people of the U.S. will show great support for kicking the piss out of "the brown skinned" country of the month.

Pinning all of their problems on the U.S. for having had support for Israel is not the way to go about anything. If and when we wash our hands of the whole middle east process, there will come a great ass-kicking by Israel on anyone that so much as launches a spitwad in their direction. The U.N. is such a group of spineless pussies that they will not stop in to do anything before Israel has wiped out at least 2 of the muslim countries around them.

World War 3 starts when the U.S. turns their back. It is just destined to happen.

Ashur · Post by **Ashur** » October 7, 2003, 3:07 pm

Killmoll wrote:World War 3 starts when the U.S. turns their back. It is just destined to happen.

I agree with that accessment.

I'd probably gotten to ready about 5 iterations over the last month on these threads with the same conclusion but always said "Nah, why bother" and cancelled the post.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » October 7, 2003, 3:19 pm

Ashur [FoH] wrote:I'd probably gotten to ready about 5 iterations over the last month on these threads with the same conclusion but always said "Nah, why bother" and cancelled the post.

Thanks for the update. I was going to have subway for lunch but instead I decided to have a salad.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » October 7, 2003, 3:22 pm

i wasnt advocating a "hands off approach to the region" Kilmoll.

I am advocating an even handed approach.

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » October 7, 2003, 3:25 pm

was it ceasar?

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » October 7, 2003, 4:06 pm

Voronwë wrote:i wasnt advocating a "hands off approach to the region" Kilmoll.

I am advocating an even handed approach.

Yeah. That would be a great thing if it were possible. The down side is that no matter how fair we would try to make things, both sides will blame us. The only way the middle eastern countries will ever not view us as the great white devils is if we come in and destroy Israel and give them that land. Well that is just not ever going to happen and no sane person would think it would be possible.

So knowing that it is a complete impossibility to having a fair and even handed approach, then what would you suggest we do?

(I am not attacking you by the way....it is just an inevitable and predicted outcome of what would happen in that region)

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » October 7, 2003, 4:14 pm

I suggest we let the UN handle it for once and show minimal support for Isreal. It will take some heat off our backs and maybe even ease some tensions (loosely worded there).

Forthe · Post by **Forthe** » October 7, 2003, 4:16 pm

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:
Voronwë wrote:i wasnt advocating a "hands off approach to the region" Kilmoll.

I am advocating an even handed approach.
Yeah. That would be a great thing if it were possible. The down side is that no matter how fair we would try to make things, both sides will blame us. The only way the middle eastern countries will ever not view us as the great white devils is if we come in and destroy Israel and give them that land. Well that is just not ever going to happen and no sane person would think it would be possible.

So knowing that it is a complete impossibility to having a fair and even handed approach, then what would you suggest we do?

(I am not attacking you by the way....it is just an inevitable and predicted outcome of what would happen in that region)

Enforce the original UN resolutions that created two states. Put together a large coalition to enforce it and smack senseless either side that starts shit.

Stop blaming the UN for this. The US veto cripples the UN here.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » October 7, 2003, 4:23 pm

The US veto of what? We just attempted again to do this very same thing and it has erupted once more. Who is the UN going to smack senseless? Sure you can punish Israel for anything their military does, but how do you punish rogue groups of terrorists on the Palestinian side? If you consider the terrorists to be Palestine military, then every single suicide bombing in Israel should be counted the same as an Israel strike....and I would have to say that the terrorists have lashed out with more pre-emptive strikes than Israel would ever launch.

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » October 7, 2003, 4:28 pm

I will pull up the thread, but the US was the sole veto at a UN meeting regarding Isreal/Palestine.

EDIT: http://www.veeshanvault.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=5817

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » October 7, 2003, 6:36 pm

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:The US veto of what?

The US has vetoed every single UN resolution regarding Israel across the board. Every single one. If it has the word "Israel" in it then the US vetos it.

It is Israel's policy to stay away from the UN as much as it can. They have used their influence in washington to convince your government to veto anything regarding them, and have been doing it since the 60s.

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/me ... tosubj.htm

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » October 7, 2003, 6:43 pm

interesting article on teh cover of today's Wall Street Journal that is on topic.

It basically talks about how groups like Al Aqsa Martyr's Brigade are becoming increasingly powerful, and that nobody, not Arafat's Fatah or any other group has any control over them.

In Jenin, Israel has totally crippled the police force, and Al Aqsa runs the town.

Asking the Palestinian Authority to control these groups is asking them to do something they simply do not have the ability to do, even if they have the political will to do so (which is another subject).

Zakariya Zubeidi is the poster boy for a new generation of Palestinian militants who openly defy the old-guard leadership and are increasingly calling the shots in the streets of places like Jenin, where civil authority is all but nonexistent.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » October 7, 2003, 7:14 pm

Interview with 3 Israeli kids, 2 8 year olds and 1 10 year olds. It is in Norwegian but here is the link: http://www.dagbladet.no/nyheter/2003/10/07/380358.html

I'll translate the interesting quotes:
"I have only seen Arabs on tv, and don't want to see them here either. They are all bad people."

Interviewer: "Have you considered that Palestinians would prefere to bike and enjoy themself like you are doing?" (they were blading when stopped for an interview).

"No, I don't think so. Arabs can dress nicely and look like us, but they want us nothing but harmful things."

"You can't socialize with them or play with them, because you can not trust them."

"We should kill all Arabs but it wouldn't help. New ones would just show up."

So which one of you guys was it again that said that Palestinian kids were brainwashed, and claimed that Israelians are nothing but pure good people?

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » October 7, 2003, 10:44 pm

This is the same thing as during the Cold War with the US and the USSR. Both sides were told things about the other that were not true. The primary difference is that both sides in this situation are next door neighbors and DOING something to each other. Now, granted, some of the bombings may not be done by the "locals," but they have not been turned away by them either from what limited news footage I have seen lately. All we ever see are the marches through the streets with the masked suicide bombers...That cannot be all there is to the Palestinian people. I think WE know that, but there are too many that either don't want others to realize it or are too brainless to understand it for themselves.

vn_Tanc · Post by **vn_Tanc** » October 8, 2003, 6:45 am

The problem with all of that Voro, is that at some point the U.S. is going to begin dealing with the exact same problems Israel is with the suicide bombings. I can guaranfuckingtee you that when that starts happening here on a semi-frequent basis

Yeah them Mexicans. . .running the border with dynamite strapped to their chests. . .
Or do you mean from internal terrorist cells? NO that won't work either. Oh wait I've figured it out - the notion is fucking laughable.

The people of the U.S. will show great support for kicking the piss out of "the brown skinned" country of the month

It cracks me up that you think this is somehow in the future. Your nation has all ready shown it's plenty ready to do this.

Pinning all of their problems on the U.S. for having had support for Israel is not the way to go about anything

It's the truth though. Uncomfortable though that notion may be.

If and when we wash our hands of the whole middle east process, there will come a great ass-kicking by Israel on anyone that so much as launches a spitwad in their direction

Without international support Israel would lose through sheer attrition. All the fancy military gizmos they have are useless without fuel and munitions to run them and Israel does not have a bottomless supply.

The U.N. is such a group of spineless pussies that they will not stop in to do anything before Israel has wiped out at least 2 of the muslim countries around them

As has been said before, every time the UN (i.e. the international community) has tried to rein in the worst of Israel's excesses the US has vetoed it.

World War 3 starts when the U.S. turns their back. It is just destined to happen

Yeah maybe on Planet of the Simpletons.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » October 8, 2003, 1:46 pm

You are such a US hating moron that I should not even bother to respond. First dumbass, does 9/11 ring any bells? Did I say a fucking thing about Mexicans? Are you that fucking stupid?

And no...we have not gone into any country other than Iraq and started laying waste. In Iraq they tried to eliminate as much civilian damage as possible. When we go in to wipe a place out, you will know it.

Israel doesn't have enough oil you say? Well let me clue you in on something here genius, the countries they would be attacking DO.

You are too ignorant for me to even continue educating you.

vn_Tanc · Post by **vn_Tanc** » October 8, 2003, 1:56 pm

You are such a US hating moron that I should not even bother to respond

Yeah man label me however you like if it helps you deal. Anything to avoid really engaging your brain.

First dumbass, does 9/11 ring any bells? Did I say a fucking thing about Mexicans? Are you that fucking stupid?

You really think stuff like 9/11 is going to "start happening regularly"? WTF planet do you live on?
The mexicans was a reference to the other fucking tards like Brotha and Kilmoll who cited them in other threads. But just like Kyo keeps demonstrating, you fuckwits are just too easy to troll.

And no...we have not gone into any country other than Iraq and started laying waste. In Iraq they tried to eliminate as much civilian damage as possible. When we go in to wipe a place out, you will know it.

I don't see anything about laying waste mentioned. I was talking about support for kicking in brown skinned countries. You CANNOT deny your public has demonstrated ample appetite for this. Not just Iraq, lets roll, Afganistan etc etc, but all the chimps talking about "Syria next. Iran next" during the recent war.

Israel doesn't have enough oil you say? Well let me clue you in on something here genius, the countries they would be attacking DO

Whatever dipshit. You think your allies over there would have no trouble owning the towelheads. I think different. Until it happens we'll just have to keep to our opinions.

You are too ignorant for me to even continue educating you

Please. You and your mong reactionary friends can't even compete on these debates without changing the argument, focussing on minutiae to avoid the real issue or just resorting to name calling.
Yeah I call names too. I'm just using language you understand and fighting fire with fire.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » October 8, 2003, 3:04 pm

vn_Tanc wrote:You really think stuff like 9/11 is going to "start happening regularly"? WTF planet do you live on?
The mexicans was a reference to the other fucking tards like Brotha and Kilmoll who cited them in other threads.

For the record dumbass, I am Kilmoll and I never said a thing about Mexico and terrorism or anything else coming out of there. Reading>>>you.

I don't see anything about laying waste mentioned. I was talking about support for kicking in brown skinned countries. You CANNOT deny your public has demonstrated ample appetite for this. Not just Iraq, lets roll, Afganistan etc etc, but all the chimps talking about "Syria next. Iran next" during the recent war.

And much of the popular opinion has begun to change as there have been no more attacks here. If and when regular attacks become like they are in Israel, the people here will call for serious blood.

[/quote]

Aabidano · Post by **Aabidano** » October 8, 2003, 3:19 pm

World War 3 starts when the U.S. turns their back. It is just destined to happen
Yeah maybe on Planet of the Simpletons.

I wouldn't underestimate Isreal, especially if (when?) they get cornered. No one in the region can match them technologically. Egypt might have a chance against them, but I doubt it. I'd lay odds they could devastate most of the large cities in the region without leaving thier borders.

Other than terror groups, no one in the region is going to mess with them unless they (Isreal) do something really stupid. This missle strike was at least marginally justified.

Syria is blowing smoke because they have to in order to maintain face.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » October 8, 2003, 11:34 pm

Israel has proven themselves with their military before, but this time I think they used it rashly. I don't agree with what they did or how they did it, but then again I (LIKE ALL OF YOU) am not privy to all of the information that they, and Syria, had regarding the matter.

Oh, Tanc...Would you have said 9/11 would have happened on 9/10? I am not saying that it can or cannot ever happen again, but for some people, it opened their eyes to what was already going on around on the other side of the world on a lesser scale. Unfortunately, there are/were some Americans that do/did express the "Roll 'em" attitude you referred to. Look at the Middle East....hmm, I think they have people like that as well. Just as they did before we started doing things in Afghanistan and Iraq. Kenya...What happened there was a warmup drill for 9/11 style terrorism. Before that what could be seen was the same as what is still happening in Iraq such as suicide bomber. This even happened I believe to US Marine barracks in Beirut several years back. Although some on this board may have no clue what I am referring to with that. It's recognized that "we" are not wanted there. I see it, you see it, and I am sure our governments can see it as well. When someone there shows that they have no regard for national borders anymore, i.e. Saddam Hussein, the area becomes a global focal point. Personally, I feel that more should have been done about Iraq then rather than now, but I am not an author of treaties let alone the one that took place after the invasion of Kuwait.

Granted, "we" rolled 'em in the Middle Ages a couple times...that could create some resentment. I would personally love to see how different the world would be now if "they" had not been "pushed" out of south Europe before the Crusades. From all of my studies, there were many who treated knowledge as the greatest weapon one could possess. I think we are all wimps compared to that way of thinking no matter how much we flame, bitch, nuke, steamroll, name call, bomb, etc. whether it be on a board like this one, or in a conflict/war like what is still taking place in the middle east now. It's a little late to say "oops." What has happened has happened. Now it's time to clean up the mess. <---That's a period