ISRAEL - IRAN - SYRIA - HAMAS - HEZBOLLAH - WWWIII?

Set, you do manage to find a few nits. Too bad you are almost always wrong on the issue at hand.

0 Replies

If you contend that i'm wrong, then you need simply demonstrate as much.

Tell me again about the 1956 war, i get a kick out of your fractured fairy tales . . .

0 Replies

There really wasn't a war in 1956. Moreover, nothing I said was incorrect.

You seem to get off on finding nits, such as Okie's alleged error concerning Hez rocketing. You must have hit Okie a dozen times on this alleged nit. I guess finding a nit is the highlight of your life.

0 Replies

You said this:

Advocate wrote:

Israel's massive responses to attacks by Hamas and Hezbollah are forcing the controlled Arab populations to realize that the organizations are bad for their health.

And this is incorrect. Israel's responses have made Hezbollah stronger than ever in the eyes of the Arabs.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

You said that the Israelis attacked the Suez Canal, that was incorrect. You said, first, that Egypt had not attacked Israel, and then that Israel was responding to Egyptian attacks--one of those statements (appearing in two consecutive sentences) was incorrct, but it's hard to know what you believe when you contradict yourself so obviously. You stated that the Israeli invasion of Egyptian territory was "transitory," and then wrote of them "trekking" across Egyptian territory. One of those statements was incorrect, and it was the one about "transitory." Driving armored columns to the extreme southern end of the Sinai Penninsula is a lot more like "trekking" than transitory.

My remarks about rockets had absolutely nothing to do with Okie. Once again, you demonstrate your flair for getting so many things wrong. Fox claimed that Hezbollah had launched "thousands" of rockets before any "massive military response" by Israel. I did repeatedly ask her for evidence that that were so. She never provided any.

0 Replies

The contradictions are only in your literalistic mind. My statements were basically correct.

Your taking everything literally, and being such a nit picker, it is virtually impossible to have an adult discussion with you. You are obviously a difficult and unpopular person.

0 Replies

Yeah, i'm pretty unpopular . . . jokers like you keep throwing electrons at me . . . ouch!

It may not have occured to you, but this ain't no popularity contest.

0 Replies

By the way, i've never seen you make a basically correct statement about Israel and the situation in the middle east yet. I've seen you busy on your manure spreader, though.

0 Replies

Finally, when you say that Egypt did not attack Israel, and then, in the immediately succeeding sentence say that Israel was responding to Egyptian attacks--that's a contradiction, literally. Get over it.

0 Replies

Set, your reading comprehension is atrocious. What I said about 1956 was there was no triggering Egyptian attack. However, Egypt HAD mounted terroristic-type in the past. Egypt and Israel were in a state of war. You constantly misquote people.

0 Replies

Set, let me help you out on the PLO. See:

http://www.aolsvc.worldbook.aol.com/wb/Article?id=ar411250&st=%22palestine+liberation+organization%22

0 Replies

Advocate wrote:

Set, your reading comprehension is atrocious. What I said about 1956 was there was no triggering Egyptian attack. However, Egypt HAD mounted terroristic-type in the past. Egypt and Israel were in a state of war. You constantly misquote people.

That's a lie. What you write above is not what you wrote previosly. Additionally, your accusation that Egypt had "mounted terroristic-type" (one assumes you mean attacks) in the past is without foundation. Even the Israelis didn't make that claim, and this has already been pointed out to you. It is hilarious, though, to see you claim that someone else has a reading comprehension problem.

0 Replies

Advocate wrote:

Set, your reading ability is really atrocious. Israel was not directly responding to Egyptian attacks in 1956, when Israel was part of a force attacking the canal. But leading up to this attack, Egypt, which owned Gaza, effected many attacks on Israel.

George, Israel did NOT start the 1967 war. Egypt blockaded the Israel's port in the Gulf of Aqaba, which is an act of war.

This is your original post--you don't mention any such thing as a "triggering" attack. When you say that Israel was not directly responding to Egyptian attacks in 1956, did you mean they were responding to such attacks in 1955? Maybe in 1954? The Suez Crisis erupted in November, 1956. Do you contend that Israel waited more than ten months to respond to Egyptians attacks? You post confused and ill-informed drivel. Israel did not at any time contend that they had been attacked by Egypt. They initially occupied the city of Gaza because they claimed that Egypt supported guerilla attacks by Palestinians in Gaza.

You can't keep your story straight, you can't express youself well, you lack reading comprehension, and you don't know jack-**** about history.

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

You said this:

Advocate wrote:
Israel's massive responses to attacks by Hamas and Hezbollah are forcing the controlled Arab populations to realize that the organizations are bad for their health.

And this is incorrect. Israel's responses have made Hezbollah stronger than ever in the eyes of the Arabs.

Cycloptichorn

Cyclo, I think Advocate's allegation is consistent with numerous news reports I've encountered since the armistice was declared.

However, I generally don't trust the sources of these reports based on their prior pseudology, so I'll wait and see if they are correct this time.

0 Replies

I don't need your silly AOL-sponsored site to inform me about Fatah.

As pointed out at this site of the Naval Post-Graduate School, Fatah is a part of the PLO, it is not the totality of the PLO. My original criticism of your naive and ill-informed statement stands.

0 Replies

Cutting the Gordian Knot in Palestine:

While calling on Israel to end the embargo of Gaza, Kofi Annan went to Ramallah, and called for a unity government among the Palestinians. Personally, i think he's dead on--only a unified Palestinian government is going to be in a position to negotiate with the Israelis.

Annan voices support for Palestinian Unity government

By Wafa Amr and Mohammed Assadi

RAMALLAH, West Bank (Reuters) - U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan on Wednesday voiced support for the formation of a Palestinian unity government that Palestinian leaders hope could ease foreign sanctions imposed after Hamas won elections.

"This is a very important process," he said after meeting President Mahmoud Abbas, who has renewed efforts to create a partnership between his Fatah movement and the governing Hamas militant group.

0 Replies

ican711nm wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
You said this:

Advocate wrote:
Israel's massive responses to attacks by Hamas and Hezbollah are forcing the controlled Arab populations to realize that the organizations are bad for their health.

And this is incorrect. Israel's responses have made Hezbollah stronger than ever in the eyes of the Arabs.

Cycloptichorn

Cyclo, I think Advocate's allegation is consistent with numerous news reports I've encountered since the armistice was declared.

However, I generally don't trust the sources of these reports based on their prior pseudology, so I'll wait and see if they are correct this time.

Clearly, a policy of containment is not perfect. For more than a year now, Ican has been successfully contained withint the boundaries of a single designated thread. But there's slippage.

0 Replies

It might be less expensive in the long run to go on offense and confront him directly, before he develops the technology and will to attack other threads.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

(just what I'd been thinking)

Checking in to see how WW III is working out for everyone.

0 Replies

ISRAEL - IRAN - SYRIA - HAMAS - HEZBOLLAH - WWWIII?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know