What the Israelis are doing is interesting to say the least. They're basically serving notice that they are not simply going to be played for suckers as in the past, and that Lebanon and the UN are either going to adhere to the rules as they've been laid down, or Israel is going to treat Lebanon as an enemy nation which has attacked it which, in my estimation, they would have been entitled to do over the last two months.
Again, if Israel had been fighting according to the same set of rules the hezbullies use, there would be a million or more Lebanese casualties, and nobody can expect Israel to continue to fight under self-imposed handicaps.
One example might suffice: both Israel and the US have the technology and current weaponry to triangulate the path of a katyusha rocket and put munitions down on the launch site almost before the rocket itself lands. Israel has refrained from doing that for fear of harming Lebanese civilians.
You have to assume that if the rocketing resumes, all such inhibitions will have disappeared.
Francis wrote:
No way arguing with these kind of arguments. Any links?
The French are ready to send up to 1500 men.
Are they cowards like the 58 who died in Lebanon in 1983?
end of quote
When the cowardly double dealing double talking French send 1,500 men, I'll believe it.
Thousands of US soldiers died liberating the Cowardly French.
I think that Francis has either forgotten History or won't admit it occured-
Source-The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich--William L. Shirer--P. 291
CAPITALIZATIONS MINE--
quote----
"Two days later, on March 1, Hitler reached his decision, somewhat to the consternation of the generals, most of whom were convinced that the FRENCH WOULD MAKE MINCEMEAT OF THE SMALL GERMAN FORCES WHICH HAD BEEN GATHERED FOR THE MOVE INTO THE RHINELAND. Actually, as would be confirmed from the testimony of the generals at Nuremberg, Blomberg already had in mind what his countermeasures would be, if the French would fight---a hasty retreat back over the Rhine. But the FRENCH, THIER NATION ALREADY PARALYZED BY INTERNAL STRIFE AND THE PEOPLE SINKING INTO DEFEATISM DID NOT KNOW THIS...THE FRENCH NEVER MADE THE SLIGHTEST MOVE...As Jodl testified at Nuremberg, "Considering the situation, we were in the FRENCH COVERING ARMY COULD HAVE BLOWN US TO PIECES"
IT COULD HAVE--AND HAD IT, THAT ALMOST CERTAINLY WOULD HAVE BEEN THE END OF HITLER, AFTER WHICH HISTORY MIGHT HAVE TAKEN QUITE A DIFFERENT AND BRIGHTER TURN THAN IT DID FOR THE DICTATOR COULD NOT HAVE SURVIVED SUCH A FIASCO. HITLER HIMSELF ADMITTED AS MUCH "A RETREAT ON OUR PART, HE CONCEDED LATER, WOULD HAVE SPELLED COLLAPSE"
end of quote
Again, I repeat, the Cowardly, double talking, double dealing French are useless as they were just before World War II.
I would not want to be an Israeli soldier if I had to rely on French Cowards to suppress the Hezbollah!!!
BernardR wrote:Again, I repeat, the Cowardly, double talking, double dealing French are useless as they were just before World War II.
Until now I'd given you the "respect" of delivering some laugh, head shaking or similar.
Now, I think, you are more than uselöess on this side .... or present any evidence, why e.g. Francis is cowardly, double dealing or useless.
(And in German, you would be called - at least -
ein großes Arschloch, BernardR - in French
un grand enculé )
Here is a key portion of the resolution from the UN-
Calls for a full cessation of hostilities based upon, in particular, the immediate cessation by Hezbollah of all attacks and the immediate cessation by Israel of all offensive military operations.
end of quote- Now Old Europe thinks that 400( FOUR HUNDRED) French troops will be able to see to it that Hezbollah ceases all attacks?
One Hezbollah Guerrilla is equal to ten cowardly French troops. That is why the French got their butts blown off in Algeria-_No guts!!!!
BernardR wrote:One Hezbollah Guerrilla is equal to ten cowardly French troops. That is why the French got their butts blown off in Algeria-_No guts!!!!
You don't frighten us, you English pig-dog! Go and boil your bottoms, son of a silly person. I don't want to talk to you no more, you empty-headed animal food trough wiper. I fart in your general direction. Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries.
Old Europe wrote:
You don't frighten us, you English pig-dog! Go and boil your bottoms, son of a silly person. I don't want to talk to you no more, you empty-headed animal food trough wiper. I fart in your general direction. Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries.
end of quote
Now, now, Old Europe, don't get excited. Think of your blood pressure!!!
You really shouldn't blame me for calling the French cowards--All I did was quote from Shirer's book which, as I recall, was endorsed as excellent History by leading Historians.
But I do note your excellent phraseology. Most Americans cannot be as inventive when they excoriate someone.
English pig dog is quite good.
Go and boil your bottoms --very funny
The best is--empty headed animal throug food wiper--quite original. The Europeans have always been better than the USA in their literary offerings. But, Old Europe--Do it with less rancor. Otherwise you may hurt yourself!!!
Bernard, I will not indulge in your silly games. Obviously, you are not well learned in history nor have you read any of my posts re gratitude towards the US.
With such one-side minded aptitudes of yours, no use for me to try to undergo constructive debate.
Assertions like yours are very far from my usual state of mind which is, at least, much more respectful of humankind..
Well, Francis, I have a suggestion for you--Instead of the blah-blah you just posted, why don't you rebut the quotes from Shirer? Shirer says the French were defeatist and could have easily beaten the Nazis. Is this true?
You don't say it is not...Therefore it STANDS!!!
Bernard's not respectful of anybody, not even me, although I try my best to help him. :wink:
BernardR wrote:Well, Francis, I have a suggestion for you--Instead of the blah-blah you just posted, why don't you rebut the quotes from Shirer? Shirer says the French were defeatist and could have easily beaten the Nazis. Is this true?
You don't say it is not...Therefore it STANDS!!!
Don't be such a silly pillock, Bernard.
Francis wrote:
Assertions like yours are very far from my usual state of mind which is, at least, much more respectful of humankind..
end of quote
Sure, you are much more respectful of humankind, unless you want to denigrate the USA or President Bush.
It hurts when someone tells the truth, doesn't it, Francis?
Think of that the next time you feel like criticizing the USA or its leaders.
BernardR wrote:Francis wrote:
Assertions like yours are very far from my usual state of mind which is, at least, much more respectful of humankind..
end of quote
Sure you are much more respectful of humankind, unless you want to denigrate the USA or President Bush.
It hurts when someone tells the truth, doesn't it, Francis.
Think of that the next time you feel like crtitizing the USA or its leaders.
"President" Bush could not find his arse in the dark with both hands, but that is not a criticism of the USA. Well yes, it is, because he has been allowed to continue on his ruinous path.
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Now, I think, you are more than uselöess on this side .... or present any evidence, why e.g. Francis is cowardly, double dealing or useless.
end of quote
Please locate for me the post in which I said that Francis is cowardly, double dealing or useless, Mr. Hinteler.
As I am sure that you know, there are some people in every nation who do not adopt the failings of most of their countrymen. Francis may indeed be one of them. As you are aware, Walter Hinteler, not all Germans participated in the excesses of the Third Reich.
I am astonished that you do not understand---
The AUTHOR, William Shirer, wrote a History of Germany called the Rise and Fall of the Third Reich. If he is wrong, for heavens' sake, REBUT HIM WITH EVIDENCE!!!!
McTag- I don't know why you contribute to these threads. That is your affair, but I contribute what I think is evidence on various topics. Now, if you think the evidence is incorrect, Rebut it. If you cannot do so, then scroll on....
BernardR wrote:McTag- I don't know why you contribute to these threads. That is your affair, but I contribute what I think is evidence on various topics. Now, if you think the evidence is incorrect, Rebut it. If you cannot do so, then scroll on....
As far as things of a positive nature are concerned, I am quite happy with my record compared with yours.
And be it also noted that I contributed the information that the US pResident could not find his own arse with both hands.
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Now, I think, you are more than uselöess on this side .... or present any evidence, why e.g. Francis is cowardly, double dealing or useless.
(And in German, you would be called - at least - ein großes Arschloch, BernardR - in French un grand enculé )
Only problem is, the way things are going, those two languages are not going to be in use much longer, and you're going to have to figure out how to call people names in Arabic.
So, Israel defied the resolution, did it do any good? Is the critics at home backing off? Did they meet their objectives whatever they were? How is there a unbiased way to tell?
Apparently they sent a special ops team to stop a shipment from Syria (supposedly.) As Juan Cole points out why would you send a special ops team to stop a shipment, why not mount an air raid?
Quote:Sunday, August 20, 2006
Fallout of Failed Israeli Raid
Al-Sharq al-Awsat reports that the Israeli raid into the Biqa' was aimed at kidnapping a prominent Hizbullah leader, or possibly recovering captured Israeli soldiers. The official Israeli cover story is that they were preventing the supply of arms to Hizbullah by Syria. But that makes no sense. Why would you send a special ops team into a village near Baalbak to stop truck shipments? You would just mount an air raid on the truck. You send in a team of men to capture someone.
Going in, the Israeli helicopters flew over Qana, again traumatizing the town where residents only recently were able decently to bury 16 children killed by an Israeli air raid during the war.
Lebanese Shiites in the raided village of Buday are convinced that the Israelis were trying to capture Shaikh Muhammad Yazbek, a senior Hizbullah leader with close ties to Iran's Supreme Jurisprudent, Ali Khamenei. Yazbek, who is originally from Buday, is said to be a conduit for Iranian money into Lebanon. Hizbullah has spread around thousands of dollars per family to begin rebuilding and to pay rent for the displaced and to recompense Lebanese Shiites for their losses during the war. Since about a million Shiites were affected, if Hizbullah gave each person $1000 (which would be $7000 for a family of seven), that would come to $1 bn. Iran's oil income this year is projected at $45 bn., up from a little over $30 bn. in the year ending last March 21. In other words, Khamenei can afford to buy some loyalty from Lebanese Shiites.
There is some danger that Hizbullah will retaliate for the raid, which could start the war back up.
Kofi Annan agreed with the Lebanese government point of view on the operation, that it was a violation of the UN ceasefire resolution. The Lebanese government is threatening to delay its positioning of troops in the south if the Israelis are going to ignore the cease fire.
Why would the Israelis risk reopening the war? The Olmert government at the moment looks like a loser, especially to the Israeli public, and needs to pull off a big win. What if they could capture a leader like Yazbek? Or free the 2 captured Israeli soldiers? All of a sudden they would be heroes, not losers. So the impetus is there for further adventurism. And imagine that the Israelis have some paid agents inside Hizbullah, who are glad to take their money to tell them tall tales. "Your soldiers-- yeah, they're in this village near Baalbak . . ." "Yazbek? Yeah, I know just where you can find him. That will be another $10,000 in my bank acount first, though."
The raid, instead of rehabilitating Olmert, was another fiasco. Hizbullah appears effectively to have fought it off, killing an Israeli officer and inflicting injuries on others in the party. Shaikh Yazbek remains at large, and Hizbullah is passing out crisp $100 bills to Lebanese Shiites, getting credit for being more well organized than the government. Kofi Annan condemned it. Siniora threatened to suddenly become less cooperative. It did not exactly help Bush recruit more troops from France for the south. France wants a peace keeping mission, not a hot war that might engulf its soldiers, and Olmert just confirmed Paris's suspicions that the French are being suckered into a combat situation. Olmert wants to be Yitzhak Rabin, who presided over the Entebbe operation. But he instead keeps coming up with Operation Eagle Claw and more of a Jimmy Carter image (circa 1979) inside Israel.
source
I see BernardR is the new
bête noire on the block.
I wouldn't call the French cowards. It's just that they have had a working class tradition of cleaving to simplistic Leftwing ideologies whilst their political leaders have in the main been anti-US and anti-British Social Marxists since before the last century.
But cowards? No way. Their partisan fighters and their heroic Resistence movement during the darkest days of the Nazi occupation puts that notion to rest.
Yet it's true their submission to the North African and Middle Eastern Muslim invasion has been one of national suicide and moronic idiocy.
Francis excluding, but of course.
