[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

O.T. War in the middle East...
Author Thread
Killa4luv
Posts: 27768
Alba Posts: 51
Joined: 6/23/2002
Member: #261
USA
7/17/2006  11:02 PM
Posted by TemujinKnick:
Posted by Killa4luv:
Posted by nykshaknbake:

One thing I dun really understand is wy Isreal is targeting things like fuel depots and power plants. Won't that make the Lebanese gov't less powerful and able to comply with their demand they go nail Hezbollah. It seems that demanding is and destroying crucial non-terrorist infrastructure is counter poroductive and pretty brutal.

I have said this no less then 3 times on this thread: targeting power supplies, water treatment plants, fuel depots, food storage places, etc. is nothing more than collective punishment and the targeting of civilians. Its as simple as that. The sick, elderly, and very young are the ones hardest hit by these tactics, EVERYONE KNOWS THIS IT IS NOT A SECRET. That Israel routinely does this sort of thing is why I call it a facist or terrorist state. You do not punish an entire region for the actions of a few. No different than the US trying to punish an entire nation to try get them to revolt against Sadaam. The bottom line is it is a facist tactic, which cannot be defended.

You can say it as much as you want, but on this point as with many others you have made you are wrong.

you know what, you're right. Because only terrorists drink water, and use electricity, and eat food and get hit by bombs dropped in heavily populated areas.

Instead of telling me I'm wrong, why don't you try proving it?
AUTOADVERT
simrud
Posts: 23392
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/13/2003
Member: #474
USA
7/17/2006  11:11 PM
Its called war. All Lebanon has to do to prevent this from happenign is move government troops to the Israeli border. That will be the end of it. As long as Hizbollah can't fire rockets and send suicide bombers into Israel, Israel will not bombard them.

During wars civilians die. That's just how it is. Hezbollah wanted war and they got it. I feel terrible for the Lebanese people, but Israel was left with no choice. Considering Hezbollah targers are all ingrained in civillian territory, colateral is unoavoidable.

I dunno why I'm even still arguing with you considering you already showed you know nothing about the history, or the present state of the conflict.

At least take this as food for thought, even the Arab leaders other then Iran and Syria are condeming Hezbollah AND Hamas. I wonder why. Maybe they are so wrong this time around, its not even possible to deny, unless you refsue to see the truth and just buy 100% into Jewhating propoganda.

Read a damn history book once in a while instead of trollin around bloggs and leftist extrimist websites that have no credibility. It is astounding how arrogant one person can be.

Either way, it is my hope that this ends soon and innocent people stop getting killed, regardless of what they are. And therein lies the difference between me and you, to you the elimination of the entire Israeli population is prolly a "fare" solution sine apparently, Arabs "were there first". A calim that can disputed till the end of time.
A glimmer of hope maybe?!?
Killa4luv
Posts: 27768
Alba Posts: 51
Joined: 6/23/2002
Member: #261
USA
7/17/2006  11:18 PM
Posted by simrud:

If you want to undersand where I'm coming from by reacting the way I do, try growing up outside of US as Jew and you'll know.
You actually hurt your side more than you help it.
I don't pretend to be educated, I am educated.
And instead of asking me to try to grow up as a Jew, or asking me to try to be a jew in Europe for 3000 years (as if anyone could do that) why don't you make an argument that makes sense? I already understand where your coming from...
Abusing 'Anti-Semitism'
by Ran HaCohen

The eve of the Jewish New Year is an excellent occasion for what Jewish tradition calls Kheshbon Nefesh, or soul-searching on so-called "anti-semitism", which has now become the single most important element of Jewish identity. Jews may believe in God or not, eat pork or not, live in Israel or not, but they are all united by their unlimited belief in anti-semitism.

When a Palestinian kills innocent Israeli civilians, it's anti-semitism. When Palestinians attack soldiers of Israel's occupation army in their own village, it's anti-semitism. When the UN General Assembly votes 133 to 4 condemning Israel's decision to murder the elected Palestinian leader, it means that except for the US, Micronesia and Marshal Islands, all other countries on the globe are anti-semitic. Even when a pregnant Palestinian woman is stopped at an Israeli check-point and gives birth in open field, the only lesson to be learnt is that Ha'aretz journalist Gideon Levy – who reported two such cases in the past two weeks, one in which the baby died – is an anti-semite.

Anti-semitism is an all-encompassing explanation. Anything unpleasant to anti-Palestinian ears is just another instance of anti-semitism. Jewish consciousness focused on anti-semitism has taken the shape of anti-semitic conspiracy theories, like that of The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion: whereas the anti-semitic classic relates every calamity to Jewish conspiracy, Jews relate to anti-semitic conspiracy every criticism of Israel. As we shall see, this is not the only similarity between anti-Palestinianism and anti-semitism.

It is high time to say it out loud: in the entire course of Jewish history, since the Babylonian Exile in the 6th century BC, there has never been an era blessed with less anti-semitism than ours. There has never been a better time for Jews to live in than our own.

Up to just two generations ago, anti-semitism was a legitimate political and cultural attitude in most of the world's leading powers. Anti-semitism was something you could express openly, even be proud of. Disliking Jews was as natural then as detesting ****roaches is today. Nowadays, anti-semitism is a taboo and a criminal offence in every developed country on earth. Even truly anti-semitic groups deny their anti-semitic character, knowing it is politically unacceptable. Unlike earlier centuries, where anti-semitism stood in direct proportion to the number of Jews in the pertinent country and thus constituted a real threat to them, the countries where anti-semitism is still thriving today – mostly poor Muslim countries – are virtually empty of Jews, so that the actual danger to Jews there is minimal; representatives of Muslim communities in the West have to give up their anti-semitism as a precondition for entering the political system.

Just a few generations ago – the Holocaust aside for now – Jews were treated as second-class citizens in all major Jewish concentrations. They were denied civic and religious rights almost universally. There were limits on access of Jews to universities and many professions, to public service and to any position of power; sometimes even marrying and making children was dependent on quotas and licences. Such institutionalised discrimination and oppression is not only totally extinct today: it is utterly unimaginable. With one revealing exception (Israel, where non-orthodox religious Jews are discriminated against), Jews enjoy full religious freedom wherever they are. They have full citizenship wherever they live, with full political, civic and human rights like every other citizen. This may sound trivial, but it was not so just a few generations ago and throughout the entire first and second millennia. Repressive regimes have either collapsed, or their Jewish population has left them.

Nowadays, an orthodox Jew can run for the most powerful office on earth, the president of the United States (I personally hope he doesn't win). A Jew can be the mayor of Amsterdam in "anti-semitic" Holland, a minister in "anti-semitic" Britain, a leading intellectual in "anti-semitic" France, a president of "anti-semitic" Switzerland, editor-in-chief of a major daily in "anti-semitic" Denmark, or an industrial tycoon in "anti-semitic" Russia. None of this was imaginable a century ago. Jews have free and unlimited access to every institution in every country they live in; Ironically, a converted Jew is even mentioned as a possible successor to the Holy See. At the same time, "anti-semitic" Germany (home to the world's fastest-growing Jewish community) gives Israel three military submarines for free, "anti-semitic" France has proliferated to Israel the nuclear technology for its weapons of mass destruction, and "anti-semitic" Europe has welcomed Israel as a single non-European country to everything from football and basketball leagues to the Eurovision Song Contest, and has granted Israeli universities a special status for scientific fund-raising.

The Holocaust has been the greatest catastrophe in Jewish history and among the greatest crimes in human history – but the very fact that these words sound so obvious is a great victory on anti-semitism. The term genocide, coined by a Jewish survivor of the Holocaust (R. Lemkin) and modelled on the genocide of the Jews, has found its way to international legislation and been affirmed as a crime by almost all the countries on earth, including eventually (with a shamefully long delay) the US. The Holocaust has (justly!) become the prototype of genocide, a synonym for Crime against Humanity. There were several other genocides in the 20th century – enough to mention the Armenian genocide by Turks (which preceded and inspired the Holocaust) or the Tutsi genocide by Hutu in Rwanda (which was even more "efficient" than the Holocaust). However, while other genocides are still struggling even to be acknowledged, the Holocaust is the only genocide which is considered unquestionable to the extent that its denial is in some countries a criminal offence. No other genocide even comes close to the 250 memorial museums and research institutes dedicated to the Holocaust around the world, and no other genocide survivors have been financially compensated like the persecuted Jews. In such a world, whoever cries "anti-semitism" twice a day has an extremely heavy burden of proof to shoulder.

The State of Israel has always been cynically exploiting allegations of anti-semitism, condemning purported and cooperating with actual anti-semites at will.
Last week, to quote just a minor example, when the world was outraged by Italy's monarch Berlusconi's claim that his fascist predecessor Mussolini "had not killed anybody but just sent people to holidays in exile" – which comes fairly close to Holocaust denial – the only official Israeli reaction was that of an unnamed spokesman for the 2nd Minister in the Ministry of Finance, who mumbled that "If the words have been said (!), one can not agree with them, since History speaks for itself" (Ha'aretz 14.9, p.12 bottom). The reason for this ear-deafening outcry is simple: Berlusconi, like most right-wing extremists, has taken a decisive pro-Israel stand in Europe. So let him even deny the Holocaust if he likes, Israel will show understanding. After all, Israel was a closest ally of the most racist regime in the post-WWII era, South Africa's Apartheid: moral considerations have never played any role whatsoever in Israel's politics and diplomacy.

On a state level, some may excuse it as Realpolitik. The institutionalised pro-Israel lobby has compromised its integrity to such an extent, that I won't be surprised if, say, the Anti-Defamation League, which cries anti-semitic wolf on a daily basis, now hails the fascist apologist Berlusconi as a distinguished statesman; Actually, precisely this world-record of hypocricy has taken place this very week. Much more disturbing is the intensive resorting to "anti-semitism" claims by Jewish individuals and institutions who do try to maintain a look of integrity.Such claims take many creative forms: for example, some Jews have a morally repulsive pastime of looking for worst cases of oppression – Russian atrocities in Chechnya (whose veterans, by the way, join the Israeli army), Chinese in Tibet – which supposedly "prove" that the media focus on Israel is anti-semitically motivated. As if it were not outrageous enough to be on the shortlist of evil-doers, as if only the gold medal in this satanic competition, but not bronze or silver, is worthy of protest. And I wonder how many of those arm-chair pro-Israel Tibet specialists ever bothered to actually do something to free Tibet, except for exploiting its suffering to distract from Israel's atrocities.

The abuse of alleged anti-semitism is morally despicable. It took hundreds of years and millions of victims to turn anti-semitism – a specific case of racism which led historically to genocide – into a taboo. People abusing this taboo in order to support Israel's racist and genocidal policy towards the Palestinians do nothing less than desecrate the memory of those Jewish victims, whose death, from a humanistic perspective, is meaningful only inasmuch as it serves as an eternal warning to the human kind against all kinds of discrimination, racism, and genocide.

Moreover, portraying the victimisers as victims – a standard characteristic of anti-Palestinian propaganda – is precisely what anti-semitism has always done: in blood-libels which portrayed defenceless Jewish victims as victimisers of Christian children, or in the ultimate accusation of Christ killing, which abused the persecution of early Christians to legitimate the persecution of Jews once the balance of power changed. Thus, evoking Jewish victims of the past to defend Jewish victimisers of the present –remember that Israel has one of the mightiest armies on earth – is a moral fault on a par with, and embarrassingly similar to, anti-semitism itself.


Silverfuel
Posts: 31750
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 6/27/2002
Member: #268
USA
7/17/2006  11:25 PM
Posted by Killa4luv:

Instead of telling me I'm wrong, why don't you try proving it?
Killa: a couple of people have already proved it on this thread. In a short, bombing a power stations etc is a way to minimize civilian casualties. I think colorfl1 had a good explanation earlier on this thread. I dont know if you saw this but majority of the Arab world is already condemning Hezbollah (Tehran, Damascus). Hezbollah is trying to become the new face of the struggle in the middle east but it will never be accepted there. I think the biggest reason is that Hezbollah is Shia and the rest of the middle east is Sunni.

Let me switch sub-topics for a minute. Israel is here to stay. Instead of pointing to 1948 over and over (like the rest of the Arab world has done for the last 50 years) why can't we come up with a solution for a stable middle east? Nothing has been accomplished by Syria, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Saudi, Egypt, Palestine etc wanting to destroy Israel. Israel kept beating them back over and over for 50 years. Its time to work this to a solution that doesnt include a war but it does include the extermination of Hezbollah and the militant wing of Hamas.
A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
Silverfuel
Posts: 31750
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 6/27/2002
Member: #268
USA
7/17/2006  11:30 PM
Posted by simrud:

Read a damn history book once in a while instead of trollin around bloggs and leftist extrimist websites that have no credibility.
I hope you are not saying that leftist's have no credibility! I'm very liberal and left wing and I'm guessing Killa is too but my views are completely different from his on this issue. One thing is clear as day and its that Hezbollah needs to be dismanteled and destroyed. There is absolutely no hope for peace in the middle east if Hezbollah is still around.
A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
Killa4luv
Posts: 27768
Alba Posts: 51
Joined: 6/23/2002
Member: #261
USA
7/17/2006  11:49 PM
Posted by Silverfuel:
Posted by Killa4luv:

Instead of telling me I'm wrong, why don't you try proving it?
Killa: a couple of people have already proved it on this thread. In a short, bombing a power stations etc is a way to minimize civilian casualties. I think colorfl1 had a good explanation earlier on this thread. I dont know if you saw this but majority of the Arab world is already condemning Hezbollah (Tehran, Damascus). Hezbollah is trying to become the new face of the struggle in the middle east but it will never be accepted there. I think the biggest reason is that Hezbollah is Shia and the rest of the middle east is Sunni.

Let me switch sub-topics for a minute. Israel is here to stay. Instead of pointing to 1948 over and over (like the rest of the Arab world has done for the last 50 years) why can't we come up with a solution for a stable middle east? Nothing has been accomplished by Syria, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Saudi, Egypt, Palestine etc wanting to destroy Israel. Israel kept beating them back over and over for 50 years. Its time to work this to a solution that doesnt include a war but it does include the extermination of Hezbollah and the militant wing of Hamas.

Silver, no one has proven me wrong. When you bomb power stations, that means hospitals don't work, it means sick people who use machines to administer medicine don't work. It means food spoils. It means people suffer and some die. The same with water and food supplies. How does any explanation undo that reality? Or do these things not occur?


Just answer this:
Targeting infrastructure means you are indiscriminately punishing the entire popuilation that relies on the infrastructure, no?
martin
Posts: 75063
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
7/17/2006  11:53 PM
Posted by Killa4luv:

Just answer this:
Targeting infrastructure means you are indiscriminately punishing the entire popuilation that relies on the infrastructure, no?

wouldn't that include just about every nation who has invaded another then? USA is a facist nation whilst in Iraq.

Can you name one war that didn't use this tactic to prove your side of things?
Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
Killa4luv
Posts: 27768
Alba Posts: 51
Joined: 6/23/2002
Member: #261
USA
7/18/2006  12:21 AM
Posted by martin:
Posted by Killa4luv:

Just answer this:
Targeting infrastructure means you are indiscriminately punishing the entire popuilation that relies on the infrastructure, no?

wouldn't that include just about every nation who has invaded another then? USA is a facist nation whilst in Iraq.

Can you name one war that didn't use this tactic to prove your side of things?
There is a thing called the Geneva convention, which outlines what is acceptable and unacceptable in war. The US and Israel are among the countries who have agreed to these laws, and routinely violate them.
area bombardments
Area bombardments and other indiscriminate attacks are forbidden. ( Protocol I, Art. 57, Sec. 2b)

An indiscriminate attack affecting the civilian population or civilian objects and resulting in excessive loss of life, injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects is a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions. ( Protocol I, Art. 85, Sec. 3)

See also indiscriminate attacks.

indiscriminate attacks
Indiscriminate attacks are those which are not directed at a specific military objective or those which use a method of attack that cannot be directed at or limited to a specific military objective. (Protocol I, Art. 51, Sec. 4)

This includes area bombardment, where a number of clearly separated military objectives are treated as a single military objective, and where there is a similar concentration of civilians or civilian objects. (Protocol I, Art. 51, Sec. 5a)

This also includes attacks where the expected incidental loss of civilian life or damage to civilian objects is excessive to the military advantage anticipated. (Protocol I, Art. 51, Sec. 5b)

Indiscriminate attacks are prohibited. (Protocol I, Art. 51, Sec. 4)

Combatants must distinguish between civilian and military objects and attack only military targets. (Protocol I, Art. 48)

If it becomes apparent that an objective in an attack is not a military one, or if that attack could cause incidental loss of civilian life or damage to civilian objects, then the attack must be called off. (Protocol I, Art. 57)

legitimate military targets

Legitimate military targets are those which make an effective contribution to military action and whose destruction, capture or neutralization offers a definite military advantage. (Protocol I, Art. 52. Sec. 2)

If there is any doubt as to whether a place of worship, house, school or other civilian object is used for military purposes, then it will be presumed not to be a legitimate military target. (Protocol I, Art. 52, Sec. 3)

See also indiscriminate attacks.

civilian

A civilian is any person who does not belong to any of the following categories: members of the armed forces, militias or volunteer corps, organized resistance movements, and residents of an occupied territory who spontaneously take up arms. If there is any doubt whether a person is civilian, then he or she is to be considered a civilian. (Protocol I, Art. 50, Sec. 1)

civilian population

The civilian population comprises all persons who are civilians. (Protocol I, Art. 50, Sec. 2)

The civilian population is protected under the Geneva Conventions and these protections are not affected by the presence of combatants in the population. (Protocol I, Art. 50, Sec. 3)

These protections include the right to be free from attacks, reprisals, acts meant to instill terror, and indiscriminate attacks. Civilian populations must not be used as civilian shields. (Protocol I, Art. 51)
The USA is a facist nation while in Iraq, there is no doubt about that. The war was illeagal (based on int'l law), based on a lie, and has costed 100,000+ of Iraqi civilians lives. Would you characterize this in some other way?
Nalod
Posts: 70765
Alba Posts: 155
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
7/18/2006  12:25 AM

Killa, give it up man. This argument not going well for you.

Knicks is a Jewish team. Jews just love the Knicks!
Killa4luv
Posts: 27768
Alba Posts: 51
Joined: 6/23/2002
Member: #261
USA
7/18/2006  12:32 AM
Posted by Nalod:

Killa, give it up man. This argument not going well for you.
I don't know what you're reading.
Knicks is a Jewish team. Jews just love the Knicks!
Jews & Blacks can be longtime Knicks fans, because we know what it is like to suffer and be oppressed.
misterearl
Posts: 38786
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/16/2004
Member: #799
USA
7/18/2006  8:09 AM
Theme Music: "What's Goin On" - Marvin Gaye

killa - nice homework on The Geneva Convention

I never knew exactly what the ground rules for war ("what is it good for?...) were.

Having said that, with new violence and retaliation... things only get worse...

we can discuss political theory and so-called "land rights" until we are all blue in the face... the fact remains NO ONE has an answer... or even a compromise... to centuries of conflict ... as the weapons are only multiplied and more powerful

you do the math
once a knick always a knick
martin
Posts: 75063
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
7/18/2006  8:44 AM
Posted by Killa4luv:
Posted by martin:
Posted by Killa4luv:

Just answer this:
Targeting infrastructure means you are indiscriminately punishing the entire popuilation that relies on the infrastructure, no?

wouldn't that include just about every nation who has invaded another then? USA is a facist nation whilst in Iraq.

Can you name one war that didn't use this tactic to prove your side of things?
There is a thing called the Geneva convention, which outlines what is acceptable and unacceptable in war. The US and Israel are among the countries who have agreed to these laws, and routinely violate them.
area bombardments
Area bombardments and other indiscriminate attacks are forbidden. ( Protocol I, Art. 57, Sec. 2b)

An indiscriminate attack affecting the civilian population or civilian objects and resulting in excessive loss of life, injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects is a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions. ( Protocol I, Art. 85, Sec. 3)

See also indiscriminate attacks.

indiscriminate attacks
Indiscriminate attacks are those which are not directed at a specific military objective or those which use a method of attack that cannot be directed at or limited to a specific military objective. (Protocol I, Art. 51, Sec. 4)

This includes area bombardment, where a number of clearly separated military objectives are treated as a single military objective, and where there is a similar concentration of civilians or civilian objects. (Protocol I, Art. 51, Sec. 5a)

This also includes attacks where the expected incidental loss of civilian life or damage to civilian objects is excessive to the military advantage anticipated. (Protocol I, Art. 51, Sec. 5b)

Indiscriminate attacks are prohibited. (Protocol I, Art. 51, Sec. 4)

Combatants must distinguish between civilian and military objects and attack only military targets. (Protocol I, Art. 48)

If it becomes apparent that an objective in an attack is not a military one, or if that attack could cause incidental loss of civilian life or damage to civilian objects, then the attack must be called off. (Protocol I, Art. 57)

legitimate military targets

Legitimate military targets are those which make an effective contribution to military action and whose destruction, capture or neutralization offers a definite military advantage. (Protocol I, Art. 52. Sec. 2)

If there is any doubt as to whether a place of worship, house, school or other civilian object is used for military purposes, then it will be presumed not to be a legitimate military target. (Protocol I, Art. 52, Sec. 3)

See also indiscriminate attacks.

civilian

A civilian is any person who does not belong to any of the following categories: members of the armed forces, militias or volunteer corps, organized resistance movements, and residents of an occupied territory who spontaneously take up arms. If there is any doubt whether a person is civilian, then he or she is to be considered a civilian. (Protocol I, Art. 50, Sec. 1)

civilian population

The civilian population comprises all persons who are civilians. (Protocol I, Art. 50, Sec. 2)

The civilian population is protected under the Geneva Conventions and these protections are not affected by the presence of combatants in the population. (Protocol I, Art. 50, Sec. 3)

These protections include the right to be free from attacks, reprisals, acts meant to instill terror, and indiscriminate attacks. Civilian populations must not be used as civilian shields. (Protocol I, Art. 51)
The USA is a facist nation while in Iraq, there is no doubt about that. The war was illeagal (based on int'l law), based on a lie, and has costed 100,000+ of Iraqi civilians lives. Would you characterize this in some other way?

No other way to characterize the Iraq war. But really, what war in the last 200 years has been a civilized one? It's not like back in the day when both sides lined up in nice red and white uniforms and shot at each other in a gentleman's battle.
Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
Silverfuel
Posts: 31750
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 6/27/2002
Member: #268
USA
7/18/2006  8:44 AM
Killa: You make it sound like Israel is going after civilians but you don’t understand that the terrorists are the ones that involve the civilians. They launch their attacks from civilian areas using them as shields. They are the ones that force themselves into peoples houses and hold them hostage! They are the ones that have no respect of human life. And the terror network is one all over the world. It’s spread across Chechnya, Kashmir, Malaysia, Middle East and parts of Shinjiang China! Please don’t think that Hezbollah doesn’t do anything outside of terrorizing Israel! They train and fund Pakistani, Malaysian and Chechen militants all the time!

Israel is attacking the power stations etc because it cripples Hamas trying to get reinforcements from other countries. It also makes it harder for the militants to move around and it’s easier for Israel to track them and eliminate them! These militant groups are hiding behind civilians and launching attacks from heavily populated areas. If they don’t attack the power stations etc and try to go after just the militants, chances are they will kill more civilians that Hamas and Hezbollah hide behind. When that happens, Israel has to attack those areas to take out the militants so in fact it’s Hamas and Hezbollah that is putting the civilians in harms way!

Do rules apply when you aren’t fighting the other countries army but a terrorist group that doesn’t follow any rules at all? It’s been a joke anyway. Point out a war, which was fought without civilian casualties? No one has followed the convention rules, not Pakistan, not Iraq, not China, not Russia, not the US! Why are you singling out Israel and Saudi Arabia? Why don’t you call the whole world fascist?

It’s real naive for people to expect no civilian casualties when Hamas and Hezbollah regularly involve them. Read up on what’s going on in southern Afghanistan and Northern Pakistan! They have setup the militant law where the stone people to death etc and people are fleeing those areas. There is absolutely no way of negotiating with them. If you follow the trend, you will notice that terrorists don’t have a reason to exist or fight for. Don’t forget that Hezbollah backed by Syria and Hamas were dancing in the streets on 9/11/01! They are evil and they involve civilians!

[Edited by - Silverfuel on 07-18-2006 08:59 AM]
A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
Silverfuel
Posts: 31750
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 6/27/2002
Member: #268
USA
7/18/2006  9:00 AM
Posted by martin:

No other way to characterize the Iraq war. But really, what war in the last 200 years has been a civilized one? It's not like back in the day when both sides lined up in nice red and white uniforms and shot at each other in a gentleman's battle.
Exactly!! Name one country that has followed any rules! There is a reason why they say everything is fair in war.
A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
colorfl1
Posts: 20781
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 8/6/2004
Member: #731
Canada
7/18/2006  9:43 AM
Posted by Killa4luv:

Silver, no one has proven me wrong. When you bomb power stations, that means hospitals don't work...

Hospitals have their own backup generators... as do many establishments in the middle east --- their power station are not all that reliable to begin with...
colorfl1
Posts: 20781
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 8/6/2004
Member: #731
Canada
7/18/2006  9:55 AM
Israel capable of air strike on Iran
By Rowan Scarborough
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
July 18, 2006

Israel is in the best position militarily in its history to mount air strikes against Iran, after a decade of buying U.S.-produced long-range aircraft, penetrating bombs and aerial refueling tankers.
Tel Aviv has ratcheted up the volume in attacking the hard-line Islamic regime as it fights the Iranian-backed Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. In the past, Israeli politicians have talked openly of attacking Iranian nuclear sites to prevent the U.S.-designated terror state from building atomic warheads.
Israel has purchased 25 $84 million F-15I (I for Israel) Ra'am, a special version of the U.S. F-15E long-range interdiction bomber. It also is buying 102 of another long-range tactical jet, the $45 million F-16I Sufa. About 60 have been delivered.
The Jewish state also is buying 500 U.S. BLU-109 "bunker buster" bombs that could penetrate the concrete protection around some of Iran's underground facilities, such as the uranium enrichment site at Natanz. The final piece of the enterprise is a fleet of B-707 air-to-air refuelers that could nurse strike aircraft as they made the 900-mile-plus trip inside Iran, dropped their bombs and returned to Israel.
"They have the capability to strike Iran," said retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Thomas G. McInerney, a former fighter pilot who has trained with Israelis. "It would be limited, though. They could do 30 to 40 'aim points' in the array. I'm not worried about them hitting the targets. They will suffer losses, but they are capable of doing it."
He said Israeli fighter pilots are "the best in the world. I've flown against them. They train better. They get more flying time."
Perhaps just as important as weapon systems is airspace.
The most direct route would be through Jordanian and Iraqi airspace. Two Israeli pilots showed that they could navigate both without being shot down in 1981, when they flew the 600 miles to the Osirak nuclear reactor near Baghdad, dropped their bombs and returned over Jordan to an air base in southern Israel.
Today, the United States, not Saddam Hussein, controls Iraq's vast airspace. Military analysts suggest the United States might approve the mission passively by letting the jets fly both ways unencumbered.
Gen. McInerney said the United States must grant airspace rights. "They really can't do this without us," he said. "I wouldn't have them do it. We can do it much more aggressively and more decisively. We shouldn't force the Israelis to do it when we should do it."
The retired pilot called Iran's air defenses "1960s vintage" and not as good as the Iraqi defenses that Israeli pilots avoided in 1981.
Vice President Dick Cheney last year revealed Bush administration suspicions that Israel may take pre-emptive action.
"One of the concerns people have is that Israel might do it without being asked, that if, in fact, the Israelis became convinced the Iranians had significant nuclear capability, given the fact that Iran has a stated policy that their objective is the destruction of Israel, the Israelis might well decide to act first, and let the rest of the world worry about cleaning up the diplomatic mess afterwards," he said on the "Imus in the Morning" radio show.
In the Osirak strike, both F-16s made the round trip without aerial refueling, but targets in Iran are at least 300 miles farther away. Although the F-15Is and F-16Is have a combat radius of more than 1,000 miles, the numbers would indicate that the mission might require aerial refueling, thus complicating an already daunting operation.
However, the Web site GlobalSecurity.org says the F-15Is and F-16Is "extended flight range reportedly allows Israeli forces to attack targets well within Iran without having to refuel."
Israeli political leaders have pressed the Bush administration to halt Iran's nuclear weapons program. At the same time, some have publicly stated that Israel will take unilateral action to destroy Iranian facilities if Washington fails to stop it.
simrud
Posts: 23392
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/13/2003
Member: #474
USA
7/18/2006  10:58 AM
Liberals are not "leftists". As a matter of fact what they call a "liberal" in the US is a moderate everywhere else in the world.

The problem is that there are also some extrimist nutjobs who call themselves "liberal" in this country, who give the rest of the progessive movements a bad name. Those are the folks who come up with exucses for terror, are proud of the fact that they call themselves communists etc.

While mainsream liberals try to enact reform which is its nature socialist, and has worked in many European countries, most of whom btw have pretty much Socialist systems of government at this point, especially in Scandinavia, these morons are doing the same thing their buddies on the righ extreme are doing. They concentrating on bs issues such as gay merraige, abortion, prayer in school etc.

These are all moral issues that should be left up to the individual. The only federal responsiblity when it comes down to such things is to make sure State does not interfere with the citizens rights by passing State laws that do exaclty that. There is no reason, or need for federal legislation on the issue, other then the enforcment of the laws already in place.

We have major issues such us the undderdevelopment of large parts of the nation, in rural South and the predominantly black-hispnic inner city ghettos, looming job loss by factory wokers, a giant decifit, a tax system that does not perform, trust and monopoly violations by huge inernational corps, the fact that the army is undersaffed, etc.

These are the real issues at hand. But I'm willing to bet those who scream the loudest, and those are the crazys on both sides of political and idelological spectrum, will not even metnion any of those anytime soon.
A glimmer of hope maybe?!?
Nalod
Posts: 70765
Alba Posts: 155
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
7/18/2006  12:18 PM
Larry Brown is Jewish.
colorfl1
Posts: 20781
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 8/6/2004
Member: #731
Canada
7/18/2006  12:47 PM
About those ruthless Israeli Jews...

The Partition Plan and Arab Violence

UN General Assembly Resolution 181 of November 29, 1947 divided the land between Arab and Jewish states. Arabs rejected the resolution. The leader of the Palestinian community was Haj Amin El-Husseini, Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, who had previously instigated a pro-Nazi coup in Iraq and later organized SS units for the Nazis in Yugoslavia. The Arab league set up "salvation" army, with the declared goal of liberating Palestine and "ridding that country of its Jews."

The Arabs of Palestine responded to the partition resolution with riots, massacres and a blockade of Jerusalem and outlying Jewish settlement areas.

Husseini and the Arab Higher Committee started their own armed group (al-futtuwah), led chiefly by Husseini's cousin, Abdul Khadr El-Husseini, an able soldier who was killed in April 1948.

David Ben-Gurion decided that no area would be evacuated without a resistance, as evacuation would displace and level the Jewish community. This decision was in retrospect seen as a mistake, because Jewish underground militias did not have the capability of defending those communities, from the savagery to follow. The British, still in Palestine, looked on and did virtually nothing as the massacres erupted...

[Edited by - colorfl1 on 07-18-2006 12:49 PM]
Silverfuel
Posts: 31750
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 6/27/2002
Member: #268
USA
7/18/2006  1:41 PM
http://www.news24.com/News24/World/Middle_East/0,,2-10-2075_1969772,00.html
"We have 2 000 volunteers who have registered since last year," said Iranian Hezbollah's spokesperson Mojtaba Bigdeli, speaking by telephone from the central seminary city of Qom.

"They have been trained and they can become fully armed.

"We are ready to dispatch them to every corner of the world to jeopardise Israel and America's interests.

"We are only waiting.

"If America wants to ignite World War Three ... we welcome it," he said.
HEZBOLLAH NEEDS TO BE DESTROYED!!

[Edited by - Silverfuel on 07-18-2006 1:41 PM]
A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
O.T. War in the middle East...

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy