Leon Panetta Predicts Israel Will Bomb Iran This Spring (2012)

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

This is why Israel didn't want the USS Liberty listening in to what they were doing.

Quote:
Three days after Israel had launched the six- day war, Egyptian prisoners in the Sinai had become a nuisance. There was no place to house them, not enough Israelis to watch them, and few vehicles to transport them to prison camps. But there was another way to deal with them.

As the Liberty sat within eyeshot of El Arish, eavesdropping on surrounding communications, Israeli soldiers turned the town into a slaughterhouse, systematically butchering their prisoners. An eyewitness recounted how in the shadow of the El Arish mosque, they lined up about 60 unarmed Egyptian prisoners, hands tied behind their backs, and then opened fire with machine guns until the pale desert sand turned red.

No, that is a spewage of anti-Semitic tripe.

Quote:

This and other war crimes were just some of the secrets Israel had sought to conceal since the start of the conflict.

Fictional acts are not war crimes.

Quote:

An essential element in the Israeli battle plan seemed to have been to hide much of the war behind a carefully constructed curtain of lies: lies about the Egyptian threat,

No lie there. Egypt was part of a coordinated Arab plan to invade Israel on multiple fronts.

Quote:

lies about who started the war,

No lies there. When defenders launch a pre-emptive strike against an imminent attack, that does not mean the defenders have started the war.

Quote:

lies to the US president, lies to the UN Security Council, lies to the press, lies to the public. Thus, as the American naval historian Dr Richard K Smith noted, "any instrument which sought to penetrate this smoke screen so carefully thrown around the normal 'fog of war' would have to be frustrated".

The only lie here is the tripe about Israel committing atrocities like massacring prisoners.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

If was an excused and a poor one indeed that the sailors aboard the US ship that survived the attack with the many passes of the warplanes never did buy but feel free to do so it you care to.

The mistaken ID was not of the sort that would be clarified by getting a closer look at the ship.

They already had a close look. Based on that close look, they came to the mistaken conclusion it was an Egyptian warship.

Getting a good look at something they had already gotten a good look at wasn't going to change that assessment.

It's just what happens in war. Look at that video released by Wikileaks that showed the US Apache helicopters mowing down a Reuters journalist with a 30MM machinegun.

They mistakenly thought he was a terrorist about to fire a bazooka at American soldiers.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

That would be 30 caliber machine gun. Picky, but you know. . . .

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

The mistaken ID was not of the sort that would be clarified by getting a closer look at the ship.

They already had a close look. Based on that close look, they came to the mistaken conclusion it was an Egyptian warship.

LOL a Egyptian warship flying an American flag give me a break.

0 Replies

@roger,

roger wrote:

That would be 30 caliber machine gun. Picky, but you know. . . .

No. The machinegun hanging beneath the Apache is 30MM -- as in bullets greater than an inch in diameter.

Nice big holes in the bad guys.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M230

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/systems/m230.htm

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/systems/images/m230.jpg

1 Reply

@Questioner,

Quote:

They flex their military muscle every chance they get already without it.

The hypocrisy, as always, is stunning.

Quote:

It would be a new and scary world if they had real muscle to back their threats up.

Let's do a little count, shall we, just to keep some perspective.

1. Iran never invaded the US to overthrow a democratically elected leader.

2. Iran never installed a brutal dictator and used their secret service to train Americans in how to torture other Americans.

3. Iran never stole the wealth of the US.

4. Iran has never slaughtered 7 plus million people around the world.

5. Iran has never supported another country in invading the US.

6. Iran has never used nuclear weapons against innocents.

7. Iran has never supported the use of chemical weapons against the US and its citizens.

8. Iran has never carpet bombed innocent people and countries.

9. Iran doesn't have warships sitting off Manhattan, New Orleans or Seattle.

10. Iran hasn't just relatively recently invaded two sovereign nations, committing all manner of war crime.

11. Iran doesn't make frequent pronouncements that the US could easily be turned into a sea of glass.

Now just who is it that is making this the scary world?

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

There is another deterrent against attack: not being a rogue nation in the first place.

The US might certainly want to consider that. After all, it has been a rogue nation for well over a century.

The downside to that, of course, is that they can't steal others wealth.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

I do not agree that Israel's behavior is bad.

That means nothing coming from such a deeply immoral person, Oralboy.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

Causing trouble with the international community. Engaging in terrorism. Breaking the law. Trying to conquer the world. Committing war crimes. Generally being a troublemaker.

Jesus H ******* Keeeerist, Oralboy, you've just described the USA to a T.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

The US does not violate Security Council resolutions.

As I've mentioned, frequently, the delusion runs deep, deep deep.

0 Replies

@JTT,

JTT wrote:

Let's do a little count, shall we, just to keep some perspective.

1. Iran never invaded the US to overthrow a democratically elected leader.

While the US acquiesced with and even helped with the coup, we were hardly the driving force behind it.

The same clerics who later overthrew the Shah were just as involved in putting the Shah in power.

JTT wrote:

6. Iran has never used nuclear weapons against innocents.

Hiroshima was a huge military center filled with tens of thousands of Japanese soldiers.

Nagasaki was an industrial center filled with huge weapons factories.

Both cities received leaflets warning civilians that they were on a list of targets that were about to be destroyed by large bombing raids.

JTT wrote:

10. Iran hasn't just relatively recently invaded two sovereign nations, committing all manner of war crime.

Afghanistan was invaded because of their complicity in the brutal murder of 3,000 Americans on American soil.

And what is the problem with overthrowing Saddam and setting up a democracy?

Iran has caused more than their share of trouble.

There was the illegal overrunning of our embassy and taking hostages.

There was their murder of hundreds of Marines in Lebanon in the 1980s.

There was their taking innocent people hostage for years in Lebanon in the 1980s.

There were their attacks on US warships in the 1980s.

There were their bombings murdering US soldiers in Saudi Arabia in the 1990s.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

You really are a moron with a simplistic view of the world. You desperately want the world to be the way you want it to be, and dismiss any facts that challenge that perception as being anti-semitic.

The Guardian is a highly respected newspaper, in fact when most newspapers were criticised by the Levenson inquiry, the Guardian was praised for its high journalistic standards.

You have the mindset of a petulant teenager, your blinkered view of Israel is fuelled by rampant Islamaphobia, in the same way that your dislike of Italy is caused by some masturbatury obsession with Amanda Knox.

There's no point in discussing anything with someone who is too stubborn and stupid to see the world as it actually is.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Okay. I would have called it a cannon at that size, but okay.

0 Replies

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

You really are a moron with a simplistic view of the world.

You trash shouldn't run around falsely accusing your betters of your own stupidity.

izzythepush wrote:

You really are a moron with a simplistic view of the world. You desperately want the world to be the way you want it to be, and dismiss any facts that challenge that perception as being anti-semitic.

There is nothing even remotely factual about your anti-Semitism.

izzythepush wrote:

The Guardian is a highly respected newspaper,

True. I'm fond of them as a source myself. But that does not require me to accept anti-Semitism, no matter where it is printed.

izzythepush wrote:

your blinkered view of Israel

Nothing even remotely blinkered about it. I'm just not an anti-Semite.

izzythepush wrote:

in the same way that your dislike of Italy is caused by some masturbatury obsession with Amanda Knox.

You are such an evil scumbag that you have no comprehension of ethics.

But if you did comprehend ethics, you'd know that sexual desire is not the only reason people do the right thing.

Some of us do the right thing simply because we are good people.

But nevermind. You are evil and you'll never comprehend good.

(If you're ever looking for a job, Assad is looking for immoral freaks like you to help him massacre civilians in Syria.)

1 Reply

@oralloy,

You are an extremely repulsive individual. The disgusting way you maligned the grieving family of Meredith Kercher shows you for the louse you truly are.

Your definition of anti-semitism is anything that isn't slavishly uncritical of Israel. When you lazily throw such a charge about you actually devalue its impact. If anti-semitism is simply reduced to criticism of Israel it delegitimises its use when there are real cases of anti-semitism in this world. At worst it actually legitimises anti-semitism as a viable way to protest against Israel's subjugation of the Palestinians.

As for your childish use of Assad, I thought you would support him. Nobody is killing as many Moslems as him right now.

3 Replies

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

You are an extremely repulsive individual. The disgusting way you maligned the grieving family of Meredith Kercher shows you for the louse you truly are.

Your definition of anti-semitism is anything that isn't slavishly uncritical of Israel. When you lazily throw such a charge about you actually devalue its impact. If anti-semitism is simply reduced to criticism of Israel it delegitimises its use when there are real cases of anti-semitism in this world. At worst it actually legitimises anti-semitism as a viable way to protest against Israel's subjugation of the Palestinians.

I 'm no expert,
but I 'm under the impression that "anti-semite" is defined
as being hostile toward Arabs and Jews, both. Yes ?

izzythepush wrote:

As for your childish use of Assad, I thought you would support him.
Nobody is killing as many Moslems as him right now.

Thay said that Stalin killed more communists than Hitler did.

David

2 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

You're quite right on both points Dave, and that's why Oralboy's casual use of the term does a disservice to both races.

On another note, you like to point out you live in a port city, as do I, and would feel a lot more secure if Iran's nuclear programme were nipped in the bud. Iran may not have the capacity to launch a nuclear strike, but it definitely has the capacity to make a dirty bomb. For all we know, Iranian intelligence may have already smuggled the componants for such a device into a country like Venezuela, Nicaragua, or continental Europe.

If that is the case, do you think that a missile strike against Iran make the use of such a device against one of our cities more or less likely?

0 Replies

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

You are an extremely repulsive individual.

The eviler the scumbag, the more the scumbag objects to me.

izzythepush wrote:

The disgusting way you maligned the grieving family of Meredith Kercher shows you for the louse you truly are.

You mean where I condemned them for their vile efforts to prevent innocent people from receiving a fair trial?

Look, you're a bad person. You are just plain ethically incapable of understanding why someone would condemn an effort to deny a fair trial for innocent people.

But I can assure you that the Kerchers are scum, and it was pure Karma when their efforts to railroad the innocent backfired and got Guede a massive sentence reduction.

izzythepush wrote:

Your definition of anti-semitism is anything that isn't slavishly uncritical of Israel.

Not necessarily. But I'm certainly not going to listen to your hateful lies about Israel.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

I 'm no expert,
but I 'm under the impression that "anti-semite" is defined
as being hostile toward Arabs and Jews, both. Yes ?

Actually no. The term refers to the hate that is manifested specifically at Jews.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

protest against Israel's subjugation of the Palestinians.

That's a lie on the face of it, as Israel isn't subjugating the Palestinians. All they are doing is preventing the Palestinians from murdering innocent Israelis.

I find it highly noteworthy that most people who support the Palestinians, also support sending innocent people to prison.

I can always argue against the Palestinians on the merits of the facts. But nothing drives home just how vile the Palestinians are, than the fact that their supporters are monsters like Izzy.

0 Replies

Leon Panetta Predicts Israel Will Bomb Iran This Spring (2012)

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know