Man, sure looks like the terror bombing campaign by the PLO against Israel is working really well.  Israel is totally unable to defend itself against these attacks.  The people of Israel are completely terrorized and are being forced to abide by the terms dictated by the PLO at the bargaining table.  It looks like the new name for Israel is going to be Palestine.

They may not be able to defend themselves against the bombers, but they're sure doing a good job defending against women and journalists.

Sorry to rant, but my roommate's brother is a foriegn correspondant and was recently shot by an Israeli soldier.  The guy says occupation troops have very little guidance on what is an acceptable use of deadly force.  He and a female onlooker were hit when soldiers fired on what he said was a peaceful protest.

Now, this guy's not American, and may have a biased opinion, but after hearing him talk about seeing ambulances with pregnant women detained over and over at checkpoints, I'm starting to wonder why none of this gets on American media.

Ranting is OK

To answer your question, no, I don't think so.  Rightly or wrongly, the US stands behind Israel in this fight, and no matter what the EU says, no other industrialized nation will back Palestine.

Just seems like more and more there are no "good guys" in these fights.

Once these "peace" talks fail, as all others have, the Israelis will feel no restraint.  

Then watch.

THe peace talks have nothing to do with it.  What does have to do with it is our impending invasion of Iraq and Iran, Israel will not be allowed to do anything in retaliation to the Sand Monkeys attacking them until after we do our iraq/iran thing.

After that, we will unleash them and they will do their head knocking thing.

Is it any wonder that the same people who called for a unilateral withdrawal
from Lebanon were also behind the Oslo accords with the PLO?


The decision to withdraw the
IDF in the hope that a cease-fire can be arranged is another case of good
intentions mixed with wishful thinking. It is bound to fail.

Well, Koffi Annan and the UN certainly side with the anti-Israel forces.  Many on here will be glad to know that Koffi has declared Israel's so called "occupation" to be illegal.  Now all those who hate Israel and the UN will now have to start loving the UN since it has taken your side.

I see only one hand extended for the spirit of  peace that late President Anwar El Sadat of Egypt made with Israel.

And they killed him. (PLO?)

And that hand is the Israeli hand.

Ok, so if Israel goes back to the old borders perscibed by the so called arab peace plan.  What then?  Do you truly think the PLO and its citzens will be happy?  HELL NO!  They want the total destruction of Israel.  Israel will not fall though.  Give em back that shit, then when the terrorist attacks keep coming, we will all know that the Palestines , who are waging this war (not all) are pieces of shit!  NEVER AGAIN!!

The Jewish People will be forced out of Israel when the United States is a smoking pile of debris.

But not until THEN.

And I believe that THEN will never happen.

I have faith enough for both them and US.

Eric The(AsDoesHE!TheIneffableTheEternalTheAlmighty)Hun[>]:)]

Well said, SixthofGod.

But a word of advice from somebody who knows -

Leave it alone at what you've said.

To say anymore will get epithets like "racist" "Jew hater" "antiSemite" "Nazi sympathizer" and all manner of other insults at you.

Like you said, it doesn't look like EITHER side is all "good guys" in this fight.

Some people just believe the Israelis aren't CAPABLE of doing wrong. In fact, they seem to beleive that right and wrong are DEFINED by who performed the action. Arab = wrong. Israeli = right.

Which is NOT to say that  the Arabs aren't the "more evil" bunch. But then, I've never chosen my friends by which one I consider to be "less evil."

If given a choice between Charles Manson and Hillary Clinton, I'll say "Neither, thank you" and go it alone.

Post from SixthOfGod -

Nonsense. They're doing a very good job of handling suicide bombers, but for every two or three they stop, [b]one[/b] gets by. And [b]one[/b], in a crowded market, on a busy sidewalk, in a pizzeria, at a wedding, at a [i][b]bat mitzvah[/b][/i], can do a lot of damage and cause a whole lot of murder and mayhem!

Now what was that you were saying about women and journalists? My mind wandered for a moment...

Was he purposefully shot by the Israeli soldier? That is the only question that needs to be answered. There are some members of the foreign press that have a decidedly pro-Palestinian view of the subject. But Israeli soldiers seldom fire at civilian targets. If they did, the approx. 1,300 dead Palestinians since Sept 2000, would be more like 130,000.

Here's the foreign media at work in Ramallah:
[img]http://www.worldnetdaily.com/images/20001204_xndku_who_really_7.jpg[/img]


Hmmm. Well, that would make headlines in the Palestinian papers (which I peruse almost daily) and I haven't seen such as story, yet, but, since I wasn't there....

If you are fighting a group of people who have no hesitancy to kill civilians in suicide bombings, and routinely use ambulances to cover as weapons delivery vans and for transporting terrorists, then you simply do not have a choice but to have checkpoints at critical areas where terrorists have been known to come through.

I suppose you [u]must[/u] support good and thorough entry checkpoints at both the US Northern and Southern borders? Right?

And so far, no vans full of suicide bombers have driven through [u]those[/u] borders lately, right? I mean, at least not since Sept 11 or thereabouts? Right?

Well, how would you feel about [u]those[/u] same border checkpoints if suicide bombers were [b]daily[/b] coming though them?

[b]Well, my friend, those folks are daily coming through Israel's borders.[/b]

And the reason for American news 'blackout' of the chaos that these checkpoints are causing for pregnant Palestinian women in labor?

I suppose it's because sometimes, just sometimes, the American Press [u]can[/u] see the forest as well as the trees.

But [u]you[/u] would be waving on ambulances and cars in a hurry at our borders, without checking?

I don't believe that, at all!

Eric The(StillSensibleAfterAllTheseYears)Hun[>]:)]

It takes only one terrorist with explosives to make the job. On the other side, if Israel would really seal the Palestinians inside their cities, somebody will start to appeal UN for "unhuman behaviour" so it is not possible to avoid it unless you make actions that are reputed immoral by the same people that sent terrorists to make the 9-11



Because these news are all on the EU media... even when they don't happen!

You know why there is nothing about arab countries? Because there are no foreign reporters free to look around...

No I don't think so.......No one and nothing will make that happen.

But I have to admit that it is a complicated situation there.  Yes, I would give peace a chance.

There's a good John Derbyshire article at [url]http://www.nationalreview.com/derbyshire/derbyshire032202.shtml[/url]

The problem of the Middle East is not the settlements. It is not this piece of land or that piece. It is not the Golan Heights or East Jerusalem or Temple Mount. It is not oil, or land, or water, or history, or geography, or metaphysics. The problem is in plain sight. You know what the problem is, and so do I. The problem is that the Middle East hates the Jews.

...
We are dealing here with people who are, not to put too fine a point on it, nuts. The Arabs, the Iranians, the Pakis, the Libyans: they are nuts, the great majority of them. Nuts. Not playing with a full deck. Not too tightly wrapped. One brick short of a load, one coupon short of a toaster. The smoke not going all the way up the chimney. Not quite 16 annas to the rupee. Nuts.

This discussion board should be wide open for all views on just about any subject.

If you truly think that Israel is a 'women and journalist' killing kosher-version of the Third Reich, then by all means say so.

But be prepared to defend your allegations with cogent and unemotional arguments.

I, the most vociferous defender of the State of Israel that I know of (I sometimes even embarrass my Jewish friends with my zeal), will never call anyone a racist, Nazi, or any other derogatory name, so long as they present their arguments in clear and convincing terms.

Nor have I ever called anyone such, unless they showed that they were unwilling to provide anything more than the usual 'blood libel' against Israel or the Jews in general.

But, ladies and gentlemen, think for just a moment that if the tables were turned (as they were on Sept 11), and that [u]this[/u] nation was under attack by a determined foe that thought [u]nothing[/u] of wreaking death and destruction upon innocent civilians (as was done on Sept 11).

That thought that they were doing the Lord's work in killing as many of us as they could (as they did on Sept 11).

That thought that stirring up ancient religious hatreds was the key to success in this world and in the world to come (as they have done since Sept 11).

All I ask is, what would you wish America's response to be to such vermin?

You don't have to say it, I have already read your many, many posts on the issue.

[b]What I want to know is why anyone would deny to Israel, what Americans justly feel entitled to themselves?[/b]

Are women and children being killed in Afghanistan by US military operations?

Of course, they are, but we are willing to accept such collateral losses when it comes to pay back time for dead Americans.

I agree wholeheartedly with that, as well!

But I will not arrogate to my nation the right to be the only nation that can sometimes do wrong in the course of doing a greater good.

If the US is right in fighting terrorism, if Russia is right in fighting Chechnyans, if the Filipinos are right in fighting Abu Sayef, if the Sri Lankans are right in fighting Tamil terrorists, if the Contras were right in fighting Sandinistas, if the Rebels were right in fighting the Yankees, if South Vietnam was right in fighting the VietCong, then...

Israel is right in fighting the Palestinians who are terrorizing their nation. Period.

Eric The(DidYouCatchThat'Rebel-Yankee'Thing?)Hun[>]:)]

As long as Benny and Sharon are in contention for the leadership of the State there will be nothing but war and bloodshed.

Why, Green_Furniture, the present Intifadah began in Sept 2000, when Ehud 'Milquetoast' Barak was the Prime Minister in Israel.

From abcnews.com bio:

"But despite mediation by the United States under the Clinton administration, Barak was unable to reach a peace deal with the Palestinians, [b]and in the fall of 2000 a new wave of violence broke out in the heavily Palestinian West Bank and Gaza Strip[/b]. Hundreds of lives were lost, most of them Palestinian, and Barak’s popularity in Israel — already shaky — plummeted. He called early elections, thereby heading off a potential challenge from Netanyahu to succeed him. Instead, Barak faced a more militant opponent, Ariel Sharon, whose defiant visit to a site holy to Jews and Muslims was cited by some as provoking the ongoing bloodshed. Analysts believed Sharon, a former Israeli defense minister and general, would be an easier opponent for Barak. But the incumbent fell far behind his opponent in the polls, and in February 2001 was voted from office by an unprecedented margin."

So why is the ongoing fight between Sharon and Natanyahu causing any continued fighting by the Palestinians?

They were fighting when Bebe and Ariel were not in the government!

Eric The(Exasperated)Hun[>]:)]

when pigs sing and the fat lady flies [;)]

I don't know about the fat lady but pigs can sing!........I saw it live on TV. [:D]

Israel will NEVER fall. Not with the BILLIONS of our dollars sent to them in the form of US aid. And if it really get's dicey we can just re-institute the draft and send a bunch of US, oops forgive me, UN soldiers over there to fight the war for them.

But no matter how much money or US lives are ultimately spent, it is worth it, after all - they were chosen by GOD.

Yeah - it was when Roseann Barr TRIED to sing the national anthem, got booed by the entire stadium, and then grabbed her crotch to show them where they could stick it.

Yup, pigs can "sing..."

How about a little tit-fur-tat.

A whole bunch of C-4 and nails in a martyr's coffin would make for a festive PLO funeral procession.  Following ignition, I'm sure they'll be singing in the streets, and don't forget candy for the little ones.

Post from steyrAUG -

Now, on THAT, I can agree.

Gee, the US and the Truman Administration enacted an arms embargo on Israel at the time of their War of Independence in 1948. No money of any military significance was sent to Tel Aviv until around the time of the 1967 Six Day War. Until then, Britain and France oversaw the Israelis military needs.

Well, it got 'really dicey' in October, 1973, at the beginning of the Yom Kippur War, or October War for you goys, probably as dicey as anything Israel had ever seen since the Assyrians!

I don't seem to recall either US or UN soldiers being airlifted to the Promised Land, at all. Does anyone else?

Since we are the best of allies and friends, I can agree that the future of the United States and Israel are intertwined, at least for the foreseeable future. And I suppose that this was chosen by God, as well.

We do share, after all, the same despicable enemies, do we not?

That's just another one of the rude lessons that some of us learned on Sept 11th, last.

Others knew it well in advance.

An old Persian saying, that we've heard a lot of lately: [i][b]Dushmani, dushmaniman, dushtemani.[/b][/i]

'The enemy of my enemy is my friend.'

To which should be added this new-fangled American saying: 'Learn it, live it, love it.'

Eric The(Zealot)Hun[>]:)]

Tsk!....Tsk!....Garandman, call a fat lady a pig....but ROTFLMAO!



Good idea.

Tell that to your fellow countryman Raffaele Ciriello...

What happened in the Republic of Viet Nam in 1967?  Were there arms diverted from [b]OUR[/b] troops to support Israel?  Might have needed some of that stuff during the TET Offensive!

DaMan

Post from DaMan -

Gee, DaMan, I didn't think we had difficulties in Vietnam because of lack of equipment. It seems we had more than enough and to spare.

We surely didn't bring a whole lot back with us.

But you are the only person that I have ever heard complain about the Six Day War being a drain on US military resources.

Care to point out some reference material on that? And enlighten us?

BTW, where have you been lately?

Eric The(Ramallah?[:D])Hun[>]:)]

Oh, there was no need for the BEST military equipment going to OUR PEOPLE during TET! Divert it to the Israelis....they needed it more!

DaMan  

Sitting Bull,

actually the new name for Israel is going to be "FRANCE !"
I have it on good authority that the Israeli's will be given France and the French will get Israel.
Now in about three hours of hard-fought conflict (estimated actually fighting time to be approx. two minutes leaving 2 hours 58 minutes to negotiate the terms for unconditional surrender) between the French and the Palestinians, the new name of France will be changed to Palestine.

Stand by for labels of 'anti-semetism' and 'anti-Semitic' from those who believe in Israel Only.

For some, not very many but some, any balanced view of the mid-east situation cannot be tolerated.

Yoohoo! Eric!!!  You mean we (the US) actually [b]ADMITTED[/b] "we" diverted supplies going to OUR troops in Viet Nam to support the Israelis in 1967?

I mean it's like...NO BIG DEAL.......[b]OUR[/b] troops didn't REALLY NEED that stuff during the hardest fighting of the war!  [b]RIGHT[/b]?

DaMan    

Zealot,
intertwined yes.  However, I believe we are going to see a more balanced approach to the middle east - or perhaps more accurately, we are already beginning to see a more balanced approach.
I believe this approach probably comes more from the Vice President than from the Secretary of State as is most often reported.

Hun, fairly often 'the enemy of my enemy is also my enemy'.  (No, I do not believe Israel is the enemy of the United States I was simply adding to the "old saying" to make it more contemporary.)

DaMan, you do know that the Tet Offensive was launched in [b]1968[/b], don't you?

There is no way that Isreal can survive this without going to war directly and completely.  The rate of suicide attacks is increasing.

Eric you should have KNOWN better.

Yes and Stalin had a common enemy, NAZI GERMANY. I guess Stalin turned out to be an OK guy.[rolleyes]

DO you know supplies were DIVERTED in 1967 THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN AVAILABLE IN [b]1968[/b] to [b]OUR[/b] TROOPS?  !

DaMan

Post from DaMan -

No sir, DaMan, [u]you[/u] made that statement. Not me. I asked for you to show proof that any military resouces were diverted from US troops in Vietnam for use in the Israelis Six Day War.

I haven't seen your response, but don't worry I will remind you I'm waiting for it, [i][b]ad nauseum.[/b][/i]

As I said, show me some references for which you get this drivel from and we can discuss it in an adult manner. (I suppose)

So we are all waiting, DaMan.

Eric The(I'veGotAllTheTimeInTheWorld)Hun[>]:)]

Israel WON, the US lost.

Israel had full support on NO restrictions.

The US had full restrictions and NO support.

How do these things happen?

Gentleman -


I like to say it this way -

"I don't choose my friends based on who is the lesser of two evils." [;D]






I do beleive in time you will come to see you have accused God unfairly here. Unless you were referring to Israel in the "Pharoah" sense of God's choosing.

Which nation in history has been the MOST responsible for persecuting (even killing) God's prophets, and opposing the Gospel of Jesus Christ(including crucifying Christ Himself)??? "His blood be on us, and on our CHILDREN." And it has been.

Big time. Their own words indict them. If God will NOT hold him faultless that takes God's name in vain (4th Commandment) , what do you think God would do to those who admit the guilt of Christ's crucufixion??


Yer backin' the wrong horse, son.

And these supplies were allegedly diverted during the Six Day War?  That would have been quite a quick diversion, seeing how the war was only six days long.  [;)] Is this something that LBJ did in secret while publicly imposing an American arms embargo on the Middle East?

GEE, Eric!  You MUST have been THERE!  You know SO MUCH about the logistics of the war!

Which branch of service?!!!

Come on, Eric....dooooo tell!

DaMan

Auggie -

Perhaps no statement better reflects on how evil I beleive my gov't is, than this brief statement by you above.

Thanks. I think.

Post from steyrAUG -

SteyrAUG, you should have KNOWN better!

Do you think we didn't [u]need[/u] Joseph Stalin's millions on the Eastern Front?  Would it have been better for the United States if the Soviet Union had not fought the Nazis, along with the Western Allies?

And whether Stalin 'turned out to be OK' or not, doesn't matter. Every Nazi soldier who died at the hands of the Red Army was just one less Nazi soldier that Hitler had available for use against the United States and the Western Allies.

Surely you can grasp [u]that[/u] proposition?

Hmmm, wonder what D-Day would have looked like with, oh, several hundred thousand more Nazis stationed behind the beaches?

How as it that FDR put it when discussing some South American dictator who was supporting the American War effort? Oh yes: 'He may be an SOB, but he's [u]our[/u] SOB.'

Eric The(ThankGodWe'llNeverKnow)Hun[>]:)]

Renamed..... do you know what you're talking about?!!!  Thought not!

DaMan

Post from DaMan -

No, DaMan, I wasn't there and it's quite obvious that you were not there either.

I was in High School until 1970, then college and law school. Where were you hanging out?

But since you made the allegation that resources were diverted from the US troops in 1967, for a Six Day War fought almost exclusively with British and French supplied weapons, you must tell us where this information can be verified.

Otherwise, you are beginning to look a lot like a troll.[:D]

Eric The(AndANotVeryBrightTrollAtThat)Hun[>]:)]

SteyrAUG,

that's about as well and succinctly stated a comment as I've seen on these subjects.

Regarding Vietnam, "these things happened" because of people named Johnson and McNamara.  Yes, the peace activists included in the left fringe bear responsibility but with out Johnson and McNamara these people could not have operated.

Johnson and McNamara most likely would not have been good leaders for any time but their appearance on the national scene during Vietnam was disastrous.  For the United States.

Korea, Vietnam, the USS Pueblo, the USS Liberty, the Beirut and Saudi barracks bombings, etc., ad nauseam, seem to matter little. After all only military personnel were primarily killed and seem to be of small importance.  Excepting to fools such as me.