15
   

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

 
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Jul, 2008 06:16 am
McTag wrote:
None so blind as those who will not see.


Very true. But doesn't it ever embarrass you to so consistenly be a poster boy to demonstrate it?
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Jul, 2008 08:04 am
Smile
Hey it was you who said you would not read my carefully-selected and helpfully-supplied Times article.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Jul, 2008 05:47 pm
McTag wrote:
None so blind as those who will not see.

So open your eyes!
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Jul, 2008 09:51 am
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Jul, 2008 12:24 pm
Over on Nimh's "Humor" thread, there seems to be disagreement over what is satire and what is funny and what should be taken serously and what can be laughed off.

So here's a bit of satire for this thread. Funny? Serious? What?

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/mrz070808dAPR.jpg
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Jul, 2008 12:27 pm
Yeah.....

I've posted this over on this thread earlier, but it's quite fitting here as well. An article about the new policy of Talking To The Enemy that all of a sudden seems to be en vogue.

I'm not complaining.

Ha'aretz

Quote:
The prisoner-body exchange between Israel and Hezbollah should be seen in its wider context. After several years of boycotts and isolation, this summer saw the walls of dialogue breached. Israel renewed its contacts with Syria, agreed on a cease-fire with Hamas in the Gaza Strip, exchanged prisoners with Hezbollah and offered to negotiate with Lebanon over the fate of the Shaba Farms - and all this as negotiations with the Palestinian Authority over a final-status agreement continued apace.

The U.S. administration has joined the nuclear negotiations that the European Union is conducting with Iran and made it clear that it opposes any Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear facilities.

What on earth is going on here? Are George W. Bush and Ehud Olmert, in the days and weeks before the end of their terms of office, trying to do anything they can to record some sort of political accomplishment, to avoid being remembered as leaders who led their countries into failed wars? Or have they simply recognized the limitations of force and been left with no choice but to talk to the "axis of evil" without the enemy first altering its behavior? Iran is still enriching uranium, Hezbollah and Hamas are stockpiling missiles, Syria is giving its support to them all - and, suddenly, everyone is a legitimate partner for negotiations.

American officials mock their Israeli counterparts any time they recite long-winded monologues about "the struggle between moderates and extremists" in the Middle East. How does this struggle exist in the same universe as Israel's agreement to talk to Hamas and Hezbollah? the Americans ask. But their excuses for changing American policy vis-a-vis Iran sound exactly like Olmert's excuses for agreeing to a cease-fire with Hamas and a prisoner exchange with Hezbollah. The Americans and the Israelis insist that it is not dialogue, that the tough policy remains intact and that they do not believe the other side.

...


Interesting article. Also noteworthy, bit further down:

Quote:
The U.S. administration told the Prime Minister's Office in Jerusalem in advance that it was sending a senior diplomat to talks with Iran, but only did so hours before the news was due to be published anyway. There were no consultation and no coordination. Yesterday, a senior State Department official visited Jerusalem carrying messages that were designed to placate Israel over the planned meeting with the Iranians. If it is a success, the next stage could be the opening of an American representative office in Tehran, with the goal of being able to "talk to the Iranian people."
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Jul, 2008 04:19 pm
And a different perspective illustrating what we and Israel are in fact dealing with, and brings us full circle from the opening post of this thread:

July 18, 2008
A Child Killer's Homecoming
By Mona Charen

What can you say about a people who welcome a child murderer as a hero?

Most Americans are familiar with the brutal murder of wheelchair-bound Leon Klinghoffer on the cruise ship Achille Laura in 1985. Terrorists led by Abu Abbas (who was later given safe haven in Baghdad by Saddam Hussein) took the ship captive and threw Klinghoffer overboard. But few recall that the ship was seized to bargain for the release of, among others, Samir Kuntar from an Israeli prison.

Kuntar had taken part in an earlier terror attack. In 1979, as a 16-year-old, he and four others had traveled to northern Israel by boat from Lebanon and come ashore in the seaside town of Nahariya. At midnight, Smadar Haran recalled, they burst into her apartment building. Peering out to see what the noise was, Smadar, mother of two, slammed shut her apartment door when she saw the terrorists -- but too late. Kuntar had glimpsed her. Her husband, Danny, helped Smadar and their younger daughter, 2-year-old Yael, to squeeze into a crawl space above the bedroom.

Smadar wrote later, "I will never forget the joy and the hatred in their voices as they swaggered about hunting for us, firing their guns and throwing grenades." As police began to arrive, Kuntar and the others dragged Danny and 4-year-old Einat down to the beach. With Einat watching, Kuntar shot Danny in the head and then threw his body into the surf. Kuntar then repeatedly smashed Einat's head against a rock with his rifle butt, killing her, too. Yael did not survive the attack either. In an effort to keep the baby from crying and betraying their hiding place, Smadar had accidentally suffocated her.

This week, Kuntar, dressed in fatigues and sporting a Hitlerian mustache and haircut, walked down a red carpet arrayed for him in Beirut. The government closed all offices and declared a national day of celebration. Tens of thousands of Lebanese cheered, waved flags, threw confetti, and set off fireworks as Hezbollah staged a rally to celebrate their "victory" over Israel. Mahmoud Abbas, the "moderate" leader of the Palestinian Authority, sent "blessings to Samir Kuntar's family." PA spokesman Ahmad Abdul Rahman sent "warm blessings to Hezbollah ... on the return of the heroes of freedom ... headed by the great Samir Kuntar."

The statement went on to laud the "heroic" actions of "martyr" Dalal Mughrabi, whose body was returned to Lebanon. She had participated in the worst terror attack ever against Israeli civilians, the hijacking of a tourist bus in which 37 people including 12 children were murdered. The Palestinian Authority spokesman took the opportunity to vow that the Fatah party "will continue to struggle in the way of the pure Martyrs, until the state is liberated and the Palestinian state is established with Jerusalem as its capital." Kuntar, acknowledging the adulation of the crowd, took the microphone and declared, "I return from Palestine only to go back to Palestine."

And what did Israel get in return? Two corpses. The bodies of Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser, the two reservists whose kidnapping in 2006 prompted the botched and inconclusive Israel/Hezbollah war. After this shameful and stupid trade of live terrorists for dead soldiers, Hezbollah has achieved its goal. In 2006, Hezbollah had crossed the border and attacked two Israeli border patrol jeeps, killing three and wounding two. Two others, Regev and Goldwasser, also believed wounded in the attack, were kidnapped and taken into Lebanon on orders from Hezbollah leader Sheikh Nasrallah, who thought he could demand the release of all Lebanese terrorists in Israeli prisons in exchange for the two soldiers. (Hamas simultaneously kidnapped Gilad Shalit in the south.) Israel at first responded with a war. But while most of the civilized world rooted for the Israelis to destroy Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, Israel flinched and conducted a feckless conflict. Thousands of Lebanese and Israeli civilians were hurt and displaced, but nothing was settled -- until now. Now Hezbollah has achieved total victory.

Every Israeli is now at much higher risk for kidnapping and murder. Why in the world should Israel's enemies shrink from murdering their captives if they get just as much for corpses? Hamas continues to hold Shalit in Gaza. His life expectancy has just been radically reduced. It's inspiring that the Israeli government (like the U.S. armed forces) is devoted to bringing their people home dead or alive. But not like this. Not like this.

At the welcoming ceremony for Kuntar and his fellow terrorists, Sheikh Nasrallah made a brief appearance. In company with Lebanese president Michel Suleiman, Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, and Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri, Nasrallah hugged and kissed Kuntar and the rest. "The time of defeat is long gone," he said. "Today is the time of victory."

Who can deny it?
LINK
0 Replies
 
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Jul, 2008 07:18 pm
What can you say about a people who release a child murderer from incarceration in exchange for two corpses?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Jul, 2008 07:19 pm
You could ask that. Many of us think it was a terrible deal and Israel should never have agreed. But so many of you who are pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel seem to think Israel should make much worse deals with the Palestinians than this and applaud efforts pressuring them to do so.
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Jul, 2008 07:24 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
You could ask that. Many of us think it was a terrible deal and Israel should never have agreed. But so many of you who are pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel seem to think Israel should make much worse deals with the Palestinians than this and applaud efforts pressuring them to do so.


Many of you who are pro-war simply dislike any kind of diplomacy and call it flat out 'appeasement'. Many of us who are pro-diplomacy agree with Israel that the strategy of bombing other countries in order to assure peace was not successful, and that the outcome of Israel's new strategy so far has at least not been worse than what the pro-war crowd has achieved so far.
0 Replies
 
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Jul, 2008 08:36 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
You could ask that. Many of us think it was a terrible deal and Israel should never have agreed. But so many of you who are pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel seem to think Israel should make much worse deals with the Palestinians than this and applaud efforts pressuring them to do so.


To which deals that so many of us who are pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel seem to think Israel should make, and you think are much worse, are you refering?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Jul, 2008 08:50 pm
InfraBlue wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
You could ask that. Many of us think it was a terrible deal and Israel should never have agreed. But so many of you who are pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel seem to think Israel should make much worse deals with the Palestinians than this and applaud efforts pressuring them to do so.


To which deals that so many of us who are pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel seem to think Israel should make, and you think are much worse, are you refering?


Those deals that would have Israel take no measure to defend themselves and/or retaliate in no way to terrorist attacks. Those deals that would have Israel commit demographic suicide by allowing anybody who claims to be a Palestinian move into Israel with full citizenship rights. Those deals that would have Israel lower all barriers that separate Israel from those who have pledged to exterminate Israel or drive it into the sea. Those deals that include Israel packing up and moving out to somewhere else. Those deals that require Israel to make all demanded concessions before any are required of the Palestinians.
0 Replies
 
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Jul, 2008 02:33 am
Which of us subscribe to those deals that would have Israel take no measure to defend themselves and/or retaliate in no way to terrorist attacks?
I myself advocate a police response to terrorists and their attacks, rather than an oafish and self-defeating militaristic approach that slaughters yet more innocent lives, and further perpetuates violent reactions.

Which of us advocate those deals that would have Israel commit demographic suicide by allowing anybody who claims to be a Palestinian move into Israel with full citizenship rights?
I myself advocate the dismantling of the necessarily oppressive and discriminatory ethnocentric Zionist regime in favor of one that is egalitarian and pluralistic and serves the interests and advances the well-being of all of the peoples in Palestine as defined by Britain's Mandate thereof, and specifically through a memorandum it presented to the League of Nations in September of 1922 concerning said mandate.

Which of us favor those deals that would have Israel lower all barriers that separate Israel from those who have pledged to exterminate Israel or drive it into the sea?
Let people pledge whatever they want. The US regularly tolerates people who pledge to exterminate Iran, North Korea, France and a slew of other countries. We should be concerned with those who act on their pledges, and respond accordingly. See my response to your first assertion above.

Which of us champion those deals that include Israel packing up and moving out to somewhere else?
My answer to this is the same as my answer to your second assertion above.

Which of us push those deals that require Israel to make all demanded concessions before any are required of the Palestinians?
Concessions have been rammed down the Palestinian's throats ever since the encroachment of the Zionists from Central and Eastern Europe to Palestine beginning as early as the late 19th century, continuing on to Britain's abetment in repressing Palestinian self-determination after the establishment of its Palestine Mandate, through to the USA's complicity in its patronage of the state of Israel. What has Israel conceded?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Jul, 2008 08:56 am
Infrablue wrote: I myself advocate a police response to terrorists and their attacks, rather than an oafish and self-defeating militaristic approach that slaughters yet more innocent lives, and further perpetuates violent reactions.


That's the meat in the nut: Israel can't continue to handle terrorists by their military that also kills innocent people. That only exacerbates their problem, not reduce it. If anyone killed my children through military action because they were trying to kill terrorists, I may become a terrorist to exact revenge. That is human nature; something the Israelis never seem to learn.

One only needs to look at a "true" democracy, where the police handles violence within society; they do not go bombing whole neighborhoods to kill the criminal. If that ever happened in the US, we would have anarchy.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Jul, 2008 10:42 am
And by what authority does the Israeli police force or justice system go after terrorists launching rockets from rocket launchers located in Gaza or Lebanon, neither of which are within Israeli jurisdiction?

If militant Mexicans or Canadians should start lobbing rockets into American cities and their government/leaders could not be persuaded to deal with it--in fact the government/leaders were condoning if not ordering such activity--and in fact those leaders were on record as intending the destruction of the United States. . .

Would you consider that a police matter? Or would you consider it an act of war quite appropriately dealt with via military force?

How much do we put American women and children at constant risk and in fact allow them to be kidnapped or murdered or blown to bits to avoid any possibility of harming the innocents the enemy uses as shields?

You are suggesting a policy that would make it impossible for any nation to defend itself militarily.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Jul, 2008 10:51 am
No, you are suggesting it's impossible. Fighting criminals at the domestic or national level is no different. Killing innocents is just plain wrong.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Jul, 2008 10:52 am
FYI, most Americans now think it's wrong to execute criminals. Weigh that against your position, and what do you find? A criminal who's willing to kill innocent people for your own "security."
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Jul, 2008 11:59 am
cicerone imposter wrote:


One only needs to look at a "true" democracy, where the police handles violence within society; they do not go bombing whole neighborhoods to kill the criminal. If that ever happened in the US, we would have anarchy.


We would????

You mean like the anarchy that occurred after this...

http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/MOVE-Phihladelphia-BombNYT14may85.htm

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-05-11-philadelphia-bombing_x.htm
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Jul, 2008 12:04 pm
mysteryman wrote:
cicerone imposter wrote:


One only needs to look at a "true" democracy, where the police handles violence within society; they do not go bombing whole neighborhoods to kill the criminal. If that ever happened in the US, we would have anarchy.


We would????

You mean like the anarchy that occurred after this...

http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/MOVE-Phihladelphia-BombNYT14may85.htm

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-05-11-philadelphia-bombing_x.htm


Not to mention the government assault on the Branch Davidian compound in which more than 60 children were burned alive or the assault at Ruby Ridge. Admittedly these were federal assaults and not local police forces. Not a day passes, however, when there is not an accusation of police brutality someplace and all too frequent allegations of wrongful death committed by the police.

But none of that removes the fact that police departments have no authority outside their own jurisdictions.

And our anti-Israel folks are still dodging the greater issue. Must we accept the kidnapping, murder, rocket attacks, and wholesale bombings of our women and children rather than retaliate militarily in any form if there is any chance than an innocent be amongst the enemy?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Jul, 2008 12:12 pm
Fox wrote: Must we accept the kidnapping, murder, rocket attacks, and wholesale bombings of our women and children rather than retaliate militarily in any form if there is any chance than an innocent be amongst the enemy?

Who the ph..k is the "we?"
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Israel's Reality - Discussion by Miller
THE WAR IN GAZA - Discussion by Advocate
Israel's Shame - Discussion by BigEgo
Eye On Israel/Palestine - Discussion by IronLionZion
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.14 seconds on 11/17/2024 at 03:31:26