# No Missiles For Hezbollah



## MJB12741 (May 4, 2013)

BRAVO ISRAEL!  LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!

Israel bombs Hezbollah-bound missiles in Syria: official | Reuters


----------



## Muskie (May 4, 2013)

Poor Nasrallah. He's probably crying up a storm in his rat hole !


----------



## Roudy (May 4, 2013)

MJB12741 said:


> BRAVO ISRAEL!  LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!
> 
> Israel bombs Hezbollah-bound missiles in Syria: official | Reuters


----------



## skye (May 4, 2013)

While  Washington still  considers how to handle evidence of chemical weapons use by the Syrian government, and moves the  red line" further and further..... Israel is clearly showing that it will stand behind the red lines it sets.

 Israel strike in Syria targeted arms coming from Iran ...so this is a message for Iran too, it could be wise  for  the mullahs in Tehran to take  notice.


----------



## MJB12741 (May 4, 2013)

Excellent point & so true.  Israel can & will do whatever necessary to keep Israel safe & secure from weapons of destruction in the hands of radical Islamists.




skye said:


> While  Washington still  considers how to handle evidence of chemical weapons use by the Syrian government, and moves the  red line" further and further..... Israel is clearly showing that it will stand behind the red lines it sets.
> 
> Israel strike in Syria targeted arms coming from Iran ...so this is a message for Iran too, it could be wise  for  the mullahs in Tehran to take  notice.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (May 4, 2013)

Where is Sunni man to tell us Israel are the terrorists and Hezbollah are just innocent freedom fighters.


----------



## member (May 4, 2013)

RetiredGySgt said:


> _*Where is Sunni man*_ to tell us Israel are the terrorists and Hezbollah are just innocent freedom fighters.



_found him...._ !

usual hangout...at the lounge _w/*da brothers*_....


----------



## MJB12741 (May 4, 2013)

Let us have mercy for Sunni Man.  But for the grace of God, it could have been us.




member said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> > _*Where is Sunni man*_ to tell us Israel are the terrorists and Hezbollah are just innocent freedom fighters.
> ...


----------



## jon_berzerk (May 4, 2013)

MJB12741 said:


> BRAVO ISRAEL!  LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!
> 
> Israel bombs Hezbollah-bound missiles in Syria: official | Reuters



bummer

--LOL


----------



## pbel (May 4, 2013)

MJB12741 said:


> Excellent point & so true.  Israel can & will do whatever necessary to keep Israel safe & secure from weapons of destruction in the hands of radical Islamists.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I can&#8217;t blame Israel for defending herself from future pain, but she should have waited until the convoy entered Lebanon, by attacking in Syria she plays into the Jihadist hands as the greatest recruiter for their cause.


----------



## blackcherry (May 5, 2013)

Great News . 
The sooner America sorts out Syria and Lebanon by proxy , the sooner we can enjoy the excesses of America and the gullible UN  beating up Iran .
Top marks then to the Israeli air force as they " make clear the road into Damascus ".
At what stage will Putrid throw his hand in with Tehran in terms of opposing this  new American drive by proxy ?


----------



## Hossfly (May 5, 2013)

blackcherry said:


> Great News .
> The sooner America sorts out Syria and Lebanon by proxy , the sooner we can enjoy the excesses of America and the gullible UN  beating up Iran .
> Top marks then to the Israeli air force as they " make clear the road into Damascus ".
> At what stage will Putrid throw his hand in with Tehran in terms of opposing this  new American drive by proxy ?


Question: Why are you off the scale?


----------



## MJB12741 (May 5, 2013)

Are you off your meds again?





pbel said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > Excellent point & so true.  Israel can & will do whatever necessary to keep Israel safe & secure from weapons of destruction in the hands of radical Islamists.
> ...


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2013)

MJB12741 said:


> BRAVO ISRAEL!  LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!
> 
> Israel bombs Hezbollah-bound missiles in Syria: official | Reuters


The attack was illegal and immoral.

Syria did not attack Israel, therefore, Israel had no right to attack Syria.

You fuckers don't deserve a country!

You're a bunch of war-mongering assholes, who enjoy beating up on your neighbors.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (May 5, 2013)

loinboy said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > BRAVO ISRAEL!  LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!
> ...



But Syria has killed 100,000 of its own people in 2 years.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2013)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> But Syria has killed 100,000 of its own people in 2 years.


Although that, in itself is pretty bad, I doubt Israel attacked because it cared about Syrian citizens.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2013)

pbel said:


> I can&#8217;t blame Israel for defending herself from future pain, but she should have waited until the convoy entered Lebanon, by attacking in Syria she plays into the Jihadist hands as the greatest recruiter for their cause.


Israel shouldn't have attacked at all.

What they did is illegal.

And they were not defending themselves, they were the aggressors.


----------



## MHunterB (May 5, 2013)

Loinie, do you actually think it matters whether you believe anyone 'deserves' to have a country?


----------



## Roudy (May 5, 2013)

loinboy said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > BRAVO ISRAEL!  LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!
> ...


Israel did what it had to do, and will do it again if necessary. 

Arming Hezbollah, a group designated as TERRORIST by the USA is illegal, immoral, and a crime against humanity.


----------



## Roudy (May 5, 2013)

"Syria has killed 100,000 of its own people"

Groin boy: "Although that, in itself is pretty bad"

Pretty bad?!  That's it?!  Ha ha ha. But Israelis are "criminals" because they defend themselves against these same animals?


----------



## georgephillip (May 5, 2013)

What's the matter...can't handle a little competition?


----------



## RetiredGySgt (May 5, 2013)

loinboy said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > BRAVO ISRAEL!  LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!
> ...



Syria hasn't attacked the US either. Or is that different? How about Libya I don't recall them attacking the US, Or Yemen or Pakistan?


----------



## Book of Jeremiah (May 5, 2013)

Muskie said:


> Poor Nasrallah. He's probably crying up a storm in his rat hole !


Mossad needs to poison Nasrallah one more time and this time?  Don't give him the antidote!


----------



## Book of Jeremiah (May 5, 2013)

Roudy said:


> loinboy said:
> 
> 
> > MJB12741 said:
> ...



Love that flag!  Beautiful!


----------



## Hossfly (May 5, 2013)

pbel said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > Excellent point & so true.  Israel can & will do whatever necessary to keep Israel safe & secure from weapons of destruction in the hands of radical Islamists.
> ...


Loinboy (quote):     "......playing into Jihadist's hands".   That's what's called the opening gambit, Mr Spassky.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2013)

Roudy said:


> Israel did what it had to do, and will do it again if necessary.


Wrong!  Israel did what it "wanted" to do, not "had" to do.





Roudy said:


> Arming Hezbollah, a group designated as TERRORIST by the USA is illegal, immoral, and a crime against humanity.


Attacking someone who did not attack you first, is far worse than being on some terror list.

By the way, if you're so concerned about keeping weapons from getting into the hands of groups listed on the "terrorist watch lists", why is it you say nothing about the US arming al Qaeda rebels in Syria?



> _SYRIA: US-NATO Backed Al Qaeda Terrorists Armed with WMDs. Chemical Weapons against the Syrian People
> 
> After a 10 year war/occupation in Iraq, the death of over a million people including thousands of US soldiers, all based on patently false claims of the nation possessing &#8220;weapons of mass destruction,&#8221; (WMDs), it is outrageous hypocrisy to see *the West arming, funding, and politically backing terrorists in Syria who in fact both possess, and are now using such weapons against the Syrian people*._


And since the Israeli attack helps Syrian rebels, Israel is guilty of bringing _"comfort and aid"_ to al Qaeda terrorists.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2013)

RetiredGySgt said:


> Syria hasn't attacked the US either. Or is that different? How about Libya I don't recall them attacking the US, Or Yemen or Pakistan?


That's right! And our attacks on those country's are equally as illegal, immoral and un-American.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2013)

Roudy said:


> "Syria has killed 100,000 of its own people"
> 
> Groin boy: "Although that, in itself is pretty bad"
> 
> Pretty bad?!  That's it?!  Ha ha ha. But Israelis are "criminals" because they defend themselves against these same animals?


Launching an attack on someone who hadn't attacked you first, is not a defensive act, it's aggression.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2013)

MHunterB said:


> Loinie, do you actually think it matters whether you believe anyone 'deserves' to have a country?


It matters to me!

And apparently, it mattered enough to you to comment on it.


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 5, 2013)

Israel is absolutely legally, ethically, and morally right in its missile strikes.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2013)

JakeStarkey said:


> Israel is absolutely legally, ethically, and morally right in its missile strikes.


Not according to Article 51 of the UN Charter.

And if you think it's morally and ethically right to attack someone that didn't attack you first, walk out of your house right now, go up to the first person you see and hit them as hard as you possibly can, then come back and tell us what happened next!

The morality and ethics of your actions, will be in that answer.


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 5, 2013)

> . .  if you think it's morally and ethically right to attack someone that didn't attack you first, walk out of your house right now, go up to the first person you see and hit them as hard as you possibly can, then come back and tell us what happened next!



A derivative analogy above that fails at the first level.

Hezbollah has attacked Israel many times.  Israel has every right to strike munitions intended for Hezbollah.  Once the US drone technology is completely installed in Israel, Hamas, Hezbollah, and Syrian terrorists will have no wear to hide.

Good.


----------



## member (May 5, 2013)

loinboy said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Israel is absolutely legally, ethically, and morally right in its missile strikes.
> ...




*"The Iranian-made guided missiles can fly deep into Israel and deliver powerful half-ton bombs with pinpoint accuracy."*


i don't look upon israel like you do, they're not at ALL like these UNSTABLE, rogue, backward 7th century muslim hell holes....


"The Israeli government and military refused to comment. But a senior Israeli official said _both airstrikes targeted shipments of Fateh-110 missiles bound for Hezbollah._ The Iranian-made guided missiles can fly deep into Israel and deliver powerful half-ton bombs with pinpoint accuracy....".


we don't live there.  they're keeping tabs on "IRAN/BOMBS/HEZBOLLAH.  _fai quello che devi fare_ - they did what they had to do...even though it was very heavy-handed...........

and imagine the #@!$ _nerve_ of the syrian gov't ' commenting as if they haven't committed some of the most heinous crimes against humanity over the past 2 yrs....

"Syria's government called the attacks a "flagrant violation of international law" that has made the Middle East "more dangerous." It also claimed the Israeli strikes proved the Jewish state's links to rebel groups trying to overthrow Assad's regime.  Syria's information minister, Omran al-Zoubi, reading a Cabinet statement after an emergency government meeting, said Syria has the right and duty "to defend its people by all available means."


"Since carrying out a lone airstrike in January that reportedly destroyed a shipment of anti-aircraft missiles headed to Hezbollah, Israel had largely stayed on the sidelines. That changed over the weekend with a pair of airstrikes, including an attack near a sprawling military complex close to the Syrian capital of Damascus early Sunday that set off a series of powerful explosions.

The Israeli government and military refused to comment. *But a senior Israeli official said both airstrikes targeted shipments of Fateh-110 missiles bound for Hezbollah*. The Iranian-made guided missiles can fly deep into Israel and deliver powerful half-ton bombs with pinpoint accuracy. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was discussing a covert military operation.


_*Syria's government called the attacks a "flagrant violation of international law"*_ that has made the Middle East "more dangerous." It also claimed the Israeli strikes proved the Jewish state's links to rebel groups trying to overthrow Assad's regime.

Syria's information minister, Omran al-Zoubi, reading a Cabinet statement after an emergency government meeting, said Syria has the right and duty "to defend its people by all available means."

*Israeli defense officials believe Assad has little desire to open a new front with Israel when he is preoccupied with the survival of his regime*. More than 70,000 people have been killed since the uprising against Assad erupted in March 2011, and Israeli officials believe it is only a matter of time before Assad is toppled."


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2013)

member said:


> i don't look upon israel like you do, they're not at ALL like these UNSTABLE, rogue, backward 7th century muslim hell holes....


They're far worse!  The have WMD's, constantly launch un-provoked acts of aggression against its neighbors, refuse to take responsibility for anything they do and have total and complete disdain for international humanitarian law.  Plus they're protected by the US, thus allowing them to commit crimes against humanity with impunity.

Iran, on the other hand, hasn't attacked anyone in over 200 years.

Furthermore, what country has what weapons is none of Israel's god-damn business.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2013)

JakeStarkey said:


> A derivative analogy above that fails at the first level.


Just because you don't care for it, doesn't mean it fails.




JakeStarkey said:


> Hezbollah has attacked Israel many times.


List them!  The last time they fought was in 2006 during the Lebonese war, which Israel started.




JakeStarkey said:


> Israel has every right to strike munitions intended for Hezbollah.


No they don't.  

Wars of choice have been outlawed ever since the end of WWII.




JakeStarkey said:


> Once the US drone technology is completely installed in Israel, Hamas, Hezbollah, and Syrian terrorists will have no wear to hide.
> 
> Good.


You consider drone strikes as terrorism?

You don't consider what Israel is doing is terrorism?


----------



## waltky (May 5, 2013)

Why should the Arabs police their own when the Americans and Jews will fight their battles for them?...

*Israeli raids in Syria highlight Arab conundrum*
_May 5,`13  -- Five weeks ago, the head of the Arab League capped a summit in Qatar with an impassioned appeal to strengthen the rebel fighters trying to bring down Syrian President Bashar Assad. On Sunday, he denounced Israeli's airstrike into Assad's territory as a dangerous threat to regional stability._


> The contrast reflects a fundamental conundrum for Arab leaders.  Nearly all Arab states have sided with the rebel forces seeking to topple Assad and inflict a blow to his main ally, Iran. And Sunday's attack by Israeli warplanes in Syria - the second in three days - was the type of punishing response many Arab leaders have urged from the West against Assad after more than two years of civil war.  The fact the fighter jets came from Israel, however, exposes the complications and regional crosscurrents that make Syria the Arab Spring's most intricate puzzle.
> 
> While Israel and much of the Arab world share suspicions about Iran, including worries over its nuclear ambitions and expanding military, the perception that they are allied against Assad - even indirectly - is strongly knocked down by many Arab leaders.  The airstrikes also highlight one of the critical side issues of the Syrian conflict: the Iranian-backed Shiite militant group Hezbollah in Lebanon.  The Israeli warplanes apparently targeted a shipment of highly accurate, Iranian-made Fateh-110 guided missiles believed to be bound for Hezbollah.
> 
> ...



See also:

*A look at the missile reportedly targeted in Syria*
_May 5,`13 - Israel has carried out airstrikes against Syria twice in the past three days, targeting what officials say are shipments of highly accurate, Iranian-made guided missiles known as Fateh-110s believed to be on their way to Lebanon's Hezbollah militant group. Here are some details about the missile:_


> -WHAT IS THE FATEH-110?
> 
> The Fateh-110, or "Conqueror" in Farsi, is a short-range ballistic missile developed by Iran and first put into service in 2002. The Islamic Republic unveiled an upgraded version last year that improved the weapon's accuracy and increased its range to 300 kilometers (185 miles). Iranian Defense Minister Gen. Ahmad Vahidi said at the time that the solid-fueled missile could strike with precision, making it the most accurate weapon of its kind in Iran's arsenal.
> 
> ...



Related:

*A look at reasons for Israeli airstrikes in Syria*
_May 5,`13  -- A look at the reasons for and possible implications of the escalation of Israel's involvement in Syria's civil war._


> WHY NOW?
> 
> Israel has said repeatedly it does not want to get dragged into Syria's civil war but has also warned that it will not allow so-called "game-changing" sophisticated weapons to flow across the border to Lebanon's Hezbollah, an Islamic militant group allied with the Syrian regime.  Israeli defense officials believe Iran has stepped up shipments of weapons to Hezbollah through Syria, including accurate longer-range Iranian missiles, as President Bashar Assad's position weakens. This could help explain the back-to-back Israeli strikes on Friday and Sunday on alleged Hezbollah-bound weapons in Syria. Before this week, Israel aircraft had struck Syria only once, in January.  Analyst Paul Salem of the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut says Israel may simply be sending a stern warning to deter such weapons smuggling. Salem says Israel also appears to be increasingly concerned about Iranian and Hezbollah forces fighting alongside Assad's troops, close to Israel's borders.
> 
> ...


----------



## Roudy (May 5, 2013)

loinboy said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Israel did what it had to do, and will do it again if necessary.
> ...


When Russia moved missiles into Cuba, did the US president threaten to nuke Cuba?  Maybe you aren't too familiar with the concept of not waiting until your sworn enemy gets its hands on WMDs.  But then again, nobody in the US govt is asking your permission to target places in Pakistan or Afghanistan, and neither are the Israelis. 

You can scream and holler all you want, terrorist ass licker. Nobody's weeping for that genocidal mass murdering regime in Syria, not even Arabs. Except you bad ass Internet anti Semites. Ha ha ha.


----------



## Roudy (May 5, 2013)

loinboy said:


> member said:
> 
> 
> > i don't look upon israel like you do, they're not at ALL like these UNSTABLE, rogue, backward 7th century muslim hell holes....
> ...


Sure sure whatever you say. When are you going to have another of your hissy fits?


----------



## RoccoR (May 5, 2013)

georgephillip;  _et al,_

It is not about "competition."



georgephillip said:


> What's the matter...can't handle a little competition?


*(COMMENT)*

It is about the character of the conflict and the metal behind the behavior of the people.  It demonstrates what your cause is and what you really think the role of the people is.

_*Hezbollah, Iran, the Assad Government and the Shia Ba'athist Party on one side; supported by the Palestinian and Lebanese People.   

---   Versus   ---

The Syrian People and the Right to Self-Determination and Democratic Rule*_​
It is about what you believe in.  What do you believe in?

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 5, 2013)

Yup the analogy fails.  No need to list Hezbollah attacks when they are well known.  

Yes, Israel has every right and will strike Hezbollah and Syrian munitions sites.  

Drone strikes are technological phenomenon, just like missiles, not political ideologies, loinboy.  

Hezbollah and Hamas are Dead Organizations walking, kind of zomblie like, but head shots take care of the problem.

Israel will remain, and the Arabs will have to abide.

No other solution can occur, ever.


----------



## georgephillip (May 5, 2013)

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip;  _et al,_
> 
> It is not about "competition."
> 
> ...


Honestly, Rocco, I believe you've presented something of a false dichotomy with the choice you've offered me: I don't believe the Syrian People are anything more than pawns in this particular match. Not unlike civilians in Afghanistan or Fallujah.

I believe Empire functions more profitably when facing a balkanized opposition.
I believe Syria will be carved up in such a manner as to reduce its threat level to the US and Israel.
And frankly I wouldn't be surprised if elements of our CIA were arming and training Salafist forces in Syria today in much the same way they created al-Qa'aida during Carter's last days.

I guess this is where my belief starts:

"The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives is one of the major works of Zbigniew Brzezinski. Brzezinski graduated with a PhD from Harvard University in 1953 and became Professor of American Foreign Policy at Johns Hopkins University before becoming the United States National Security Advisor from 1977 - 1981 under the administration of President Jimmy Carter.

"Regarding the landmass of Eurasia as the center of global power, Brzezinski sets out to formulate a Eurasian geostrategy for the United States. 

"In particular, he writes, *it is imperative that no Eurasian challenger should emerge capable of dominating Eurasia* and thus also of challenging America's global pre-eminence."

The Grand Chessboard - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2013)

JakeStarkey said:


> Yup the analogy fails.


That's the equivalent of a little 2 year old kid sticking his fingers in his ears and closing his eyes, because he doesn't like the big people telling him what he can't do.



JakeStarkey said:


> No need to list Hezbollah attacks when they are well known.


Not to you, or you'd be able to name at least 3 examples off the top of your head.  But you can't name any!  It's not because they're well known, it's because you don't know of any and you're just trying to bluff your way through a debate.



JakeStarkey said:


> Yes, Israel has every right and will strike Hezbollah and Syrian munitions sites.


Then state it!  State the right. Where is that right codified?




JakeStarkey said:


> Drone strikes are technological phenomenon, just like missiles, not political ideologies, loinboy.


They're used to invoke political terror on a population they're flying over.  People can't go out of their homes, go the local market or simply be asleep in their bed, without knowing that at any time, they could get hit with a missle and their life is over. Constantly having to live under those conditions 24/7, can give people the same symptoms of PSTD.

So how's that not terrorism? 




JakeStarkey said:


> Hezbollah and Hamas are Dead Organizations walking, kind of zomblie like, but head shots take care of the problem.


So you think you can kill anyone you fuckin' feel like killing?

Is that the "right" you were referring to earlier?



JakeStarkey said:


> Israel will remain, and the Arabs will have to abide.


That door swings both ways.

What do the Israeli's abide by?




JakeStarkey said:


> No other solution can occur, ever.


There's more solutions than that.

How about Israel comply with international law or show some concern for human rights?

That would solve some problems.


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 5, 2013)

loinboy, history has decided this is how it is.  The Arabs cannot change what is or going to be.

Every people, including the Jews, have the right to kill anyone who threatens their existence as a people and a nation.

The Arabs had their chance for a Palestine, fucked it up royally then and every time since, and will continue to do so because History and Fate have made it so.

You will have to abide.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2013)

Roudy said:


> When Russia moved missiles into Cuba, did the US president threaten to nuke Cuba?  Maybe you aren't too familiar with the concept of not waiting until your sworn enemy gets its hands on WMDs.  But then again, nobody in the US govt is asking your permission to target places in Pakistan or Afghanistan, and neither are the Israelis.
> 
> You can scream and holler all you want, terrorist ass licker. Nobody's weeping for that genocidal mass murdering regime in Syria, not even Arabs. Except you bad ass Internet anti Semites. Ha ha ha.


That's because those missles had nuclear warheads and were targeted at this country just 90 miles away.

There are no missles targeted at Israel and they are the only country in the ME with WMD's.

Those are two completely different situations.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2013)

JakeStarkey said:


> loinboy, history has decided this is how it is.  The Arabs cannot change what is or going to be.
> 
> Every people, including the Jews, have the right to kill anyone who threatens their existence as a people and a nation.
> 
> ...


You can only use deadly force when you yourself are threatened with deadly force.  Israel was not threatened, yet they attacked anyway.  And since their attack was un-provoked, Syria has every legal right in the world to respond militarily.  Which, would result in getting their ass kicked.  So if I was Syria, I'd ask Russia to bomb Israel.  They're too big of a dog for Israel to handle.  Russia can bitch-slap Israel and there's not a god-damn thing the Israeli's could do about it.  And if by chance, the Israeli's wanted to push the issue, Russia does have the capability of wiping them out.


----------



## georgephillip (May 5, 2013)

waltky said:


> Why should the Arabs police their own when the Americans and Jews will fight their battles for them?...
> 
> *Israeli raids in Syria highlight Arab conundrum*
> _May 5,`13  -- Five weeks ago, the head of the Arab League capped a summit in Qatar with an impassioned appeal to strengthen the rebel fighters trying to bring down Syrian President Bashar Assad. On Sunday, he denounced Israeli's airstrike into Assad's territory as a dangerous threat to regional stability._
> ...


It's a little hard to imagine what the Arabs could do about Assad.
Last month (?) when Bibi and Erdogan reconciled there was speculation it would be Turkish boots on the ground in Syria when the time came; however, the Russians probably weren't too keen about that. It may be that events in Boston and Chechnya have given Putin a good reason to stand down on Syria and clean house in the Caucasus. 

I thought perhaps the missiles Israel destroyed were for air defense, but apparently that was not the case. Should Hezbollah acquire the means to knock down IDF overflights occasionally, that would complicate things for the US and Israel. I listened for about an hour today to three Syrian "experts" and all predicted this conflict was far from over. War is (still) a Racket.


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 5, 2013)

loinboy said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > loinboy, history has decided this is how it is.  The Arabs cannot change what is or going to be.
> ...



Russia won't do it.  They are quietly talking to the Israelis as we get ready for bed time tonight.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2013)

JakeStarkey said:


> Russia won't do it.  They are quietly talking to the Israelis as we get ready for bed time tonight.


I would hope they are.

Because the alternative is far worse if Syria is where they draw the line in the sand.


----------



## Coyote (May 5, 2013)

*Two similar threads merged.*


----------



## RoccoR (May 5, 2013)

georgephillip;  _et al,_

Don't confuse academic achievement _(as in Dr Brzezinski, PhD)_ with brilliance or genius; or someone with an unusually accurate insight into the world, the hidden workings and mysterious mechanisms.  History has unmistakably shown us that the Whiz Kids have been wrong more times then they have been right.  



georgephillip said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > It is not about "competition."
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

_The Grand Chess Board_ is an amazing read _(now a decade out of date)_; yet, it only gives us insight into the wisdom of the Post-War II 20th Century Thinker with the unswerving belief that America will have the industrial might, production capacity, and economic strength to maintain and sustain its influence as a political-military hegemony.  Already, the 20th Century - two-dimensional chess board has altered reality to become a three-dimensional board into the 21st Century; ushering in a whole new set of rules and strategic obstacles.  And while there were some that were busy calculating the impact of the growing threat furthered by asymmetric strategies, fourth-generation warfare, with proxy warriors and non-state actors in play; the US was unable to meet the challenge as the new Century dawned upon us.

It is not really a false choice.  On the battlefield, you support one side or the other.  The people of Syria will not care your politics and your politics will not save you from their criticism should you use some divisive political subterfuge to justify outright support against them.  The choice is very real, the honor is very real, and the consequences will be very real.  

There is no real grand strategy for the US in the future of Eurasia.  That is a mere fantasy and dream - like smoke in the wind.  The US has no handle, no leverage, or acuity to demand, command, or influence the powers that control that domain.  All that was sold off when America became a service base economy - unable to produce even the simplest of communications devices; let alone the complex mechanisms that dominate the global economies of the world and that - which would secure any lasting military superiority given the magnitude of the emerging threats.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip (May 5, 2013)

"On the battlefield, you support one side or the other."
Do you happen to know how many factions the Syrian opposition is currently composed of?
Once Assad carves out his coastal enclave, won't Syria degenerate into Libya?
If so, doesn't that work to the advantage of the US and Israel?


----------



## Roudy (May 5, 2013)

loinboy said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > When Russia moved missiles into Cuba, did the US president threaten to nuke Cuba?  Maybe you aren't too familiar with the concept of not waiting until your sworn enemy gets its hands on WMDs.  But then again, nobody in the US govt is asking your permission to target places in Pakistan or Afghanistan, and neither are the Israelis.
> ...


Duh, are you dense or what?  Syria was sending those missiles to Hezbollah who are situated in Southern Lebanon, which is very short distance to major Israeli cities. 

No, the Israelis aren't going to wait for a bunch of terrorist animals to get the missiles, and then try to target it. By then they will be carefully hidden. Of course that's exactly what you were hoping for. 

Hissy fit?


----------



## Roudy (May 5, 2013)

JakeStarkey said:


> loinboy said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...


Jake this guy keeps wetting in pants praying for the Russians to attack Israel over Syria. Ha ha ha. Shows how little he actually knows.


----------



## jon_berzerk (May 5, 2013)

MJB12741 said:


> BRAVO ISRAEL!  LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!
> 
> Israel bombs Hezbollah-bound missiles in Syria: official | Reuters



good war porn 

raw video of israeli airstrike in syria

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=f_j8ID-m1pU]?????? 5-5-2013 ??? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ???????? - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Roudy (May 5, 2013)

jon_berzerk said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > BRAVO ISRAEL!  LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!
> ...


Did you notice the Arabs in the background praising the strike with "Allah Akbar!"  Unreal. 

Thanks for showing this video of Israel being the only country to help the Syrian people out, when our president is checking to see if he has balls down there. 

AllahuAkbar Israel!  Ha ha ha.


----------



## Roudy (May 5, 2013)

jon_berzerk said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > BRAVO ISRAEL!  LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!
> ...


Did you notice the Arabs in the background praising the strike with "Allah Akbar!"  Unreal. 

Thanks for showing this video of Israel being the only country to help the Syrian people out, when our president is checking to see if he has balls down there. 

AllahuAkbar Israel!  Ha ha ha.


----------



## Hossfly (May 5, 2013)

georgephillip said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip;  _et al,_
> ...


It certainly looks like Georgie Boy never misses an opportunity to blame the U.S. for something or other.  Never would he think, inasmuch as we have seen so many Arabs countries have uprisings recently, that perhaps the Syrians wanted to have theirs too and get rid of their leader.  Meanwhile, of course, the radical Muslims are coming into the mix and they want to make Syria an Islamic country which of course is not the aim of those rebels who started this uprising.  Of course leave it to Georgie Boy to claim that some in the CIA was arming and training these extremist Muslims.  Tell us, Georgie Boy, is the CIA behind the extremists who are trying to take over in Morocco these days?


----------



## Hossfly (May 5, 2013)

loinboy said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > When Russia moved missiles into Cuba, did the US president threaten to nuke Cuba?  Maybe you aren't too familiar with the concept of not waiting until your sworn enemy gets its hands on WMDs.  But then again, nobody in the US govt is asking your permission to target places in Pakistan or Afghanistan, and neither are the Israelis.
> ...


Read this before you swallow your foot.


Hezbollah says can kill tens of thousands of Israelis | Reuters


----------



## Hossfly (May 5, 2013)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> loinboy said:
> 
> 
> > MJB12741 said:
> ...


As long as it is the Muslims killing other Muslims and the Jews are not involved, the anti-Semites close their eyes.  Another 100,000 could be killed, and their eyes will still be tightly shut.  You really think the anti-Semites actually care about the Arabs


----------



## jon_berzerk (May 5, 2013)

Roudy said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > MJB12741 said:
> ...



--LOL

yeah i did notice that


----------



## MJB12741 (May 5, 2013)

First prize for the funniest comment so far on this thread goes to LoinBoy who said "Iran hasen't attacked anyone in over 200 years."  Bless you princess for all the laughs you give us.

Iranian Troops Attack Kurdish Camps in Iraq


----------



## Billo_Really (May 6, 2013)

MJB12741 said:


> First prize for the funniest comment so far on this thread goes to LoinBoy who said "Iran hasen't attacked anyone in over 200 years."  Bless you princess for all the laughs you give us.
> 
> Iranian Troops Attack Kurdish Camps in Iraq


I believe it's you thinking people actually buy in to your dumbass propaganda.

I personally like how you throw out bullshit innuendo's, then "act" like you just made a point.

If I was wrong, then name who  they attacked, smartass!  What country did their republican guard invade?  You wanna fuckin' answer that?  Or are we just going to get more bullshit innuendo's that mean absolutely nothing?


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (May 6, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > loinboy said:
> ...



AND the Muslim haters, like you, are always there to cheer Israels war crimes!


----------



## Billo_Really (May 6, 2013)

Roudy said:


> Duh, are you dense or what?  Syria was sending those missiles to Hezbollah who are situated in Southern Lebanon, which is very short distance to major Israeli cities.
> 
> No, the Israelis aren't going to wait for a bunch of terrorist animals to get the missiles, and then try to target it. By then they will be carefully hidden. Of course that's exactly what you were hoping for.
> 
> Hissy fit?


Was Israel attacked by Syria?  No.

Was Israel attacked by Hezbollah?  No.

Therefore, it is illegal for Israel to attack them.

Furthermore, Israel does not have the right to decide for other nations what weapons they can (and cannot) have.


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 6, 2013)

Israel has the right to war against thoe who attack or would attack it.

Want peace?  Syria must control Hezbollah.

Stop the attacks on Israel.


----------



## Jos (May 6, 2013)

JakeStarkey said:


> Israel has the right to war against thoe who attack or would attack it.
> 
> Want peace?  Syria must control Hezbollah.
> 
> *Stop the attacks on Israe*l.


It hasent started :Yet:
In a month or two we can refer back to this thread, where its plain to see israel attacked syria first, by then there should be a few thousand dead israeli's for you to lament, LOL


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 6, 2013)

Hezbollah will only lose again, like it did last time.


----------



## Book of Jeremiah (May 6, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...



What war crimes?  Israel has commited no war crimes.  NONE.


----------



## Book of Jeremiah (May 6, 2013)

JakeStarkey said:


> Hezbollah will only lose again, like it did last time.



It is a blessing to see someone defending Israel at the break of dawn this morning, Starkey!  I hope G-d blesses you today for it.  - Jeri


----------



## Book of Jeremiah (May 6, 2013)

Jos said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Israel has the right to war against thoe who attack or would attack it.
> ...



It better not start either.  Worry about your own side and MYOB.


----------



## irosie91 (May 6, 2013)

Jeremiah said:


> SherriMunnerlyn said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...




According to the legal code of  ISA-REPECTERS   ---aka SHARIAH---
neither jews nor christians can be armed at all ----sometimes there 
are exceptions if jews or christians end up fighting   as allies of 
the ARMIES OF ALLAH----against the ENEMEEEEES OF ISLAAAAM 
---but such circumstances are historically very rare    ----someone 
can find those rare exceptions and true to form would logically 
insist that the exceptions prove my statement false----
        nope----it is true


----------



## Billo_Really (May 6, 2013)

JakeStarkey said:


> Israel has the right to war against thoe who attack or would attack it.
> 
> Want peace?  Syria must control Hezbollah.
> 
> Stop the attacks on Israel.


That's a pretty weird comment when you consider Israel is the one doing all the attacking.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 6, 2013)

Jeremiah said:


> What war crimes?  Israel has commited no war crimes.  NONE.


Haven't committed a war crime?  Dude, you couldn't be more wrong!

They launched an un-provoked attack against a sovereign nation and that has been codified in the Nuremberg Principles as a _*"war of aggression"*_, the highest crime a nation can commit.



> _Nuremberg principles
> 
> *The Nuremberg principles were a set of guidelines for determining what constitutes a war crime.*
> 
> ...


And the treaty in this case is Article 51 of the UN Charter which prohibits attacking another country with military force unless it is in self-defense or has the authorization of the UNSC.  Israel had neither.  They just "chose" to bomb Syria.  And a "war of choice", is a "war of aggression", no different than the nazis going into Poland.

I love how all you fuckers just keep making excuses after excuses on why you have to attack other nations and I'm here to tell ya, people are getting sick of it! These air-strikes make people wanna wipe Israel out and that's no ones fault but Israel's.  

And I don't appreciate you fuckers bombing Syria just to drag my country into a war that could lead to the end of all life on planet earth.  Russia has already stated they will not allow Syria to fall out of their sphere of influence.  That is the line in the sand they have drawn and Israel's own arrogance is going to get them in trouble, because Russia is out of their weight class.  It would be like a middle weight (Israel) trying to fight a heavyweight (Russia).  But who knows, maybe Russia won't wipe Israel out.  Maybe they'll just make Israel their little bitch!


----------



## Billo_Really (May 6, 2013)

JakeStarkey said:


> Hezbollah will only lose again, like it did last time.


So you're gonna go look for a fight?


----------



## Roudy (May 6, 2013)

loinboy said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Duh, are you dense or what?  Syria was sending those missiles to Hezbollah who are situated in Southern Lebanon, which is very short distance to major Israeli cities.
> ...


A condemned genocidal regime arming a terrorist group with missiles that can kill tens of thousands of Israelis is an act of war in itself. 

International legal expert, you're not. Ha ha ha.


----------



## Roudy (May 6, 2013)

Jos said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Israel has the right to war against thoe who attack or would attack it.
> ...


Or we might see the entire southern part of Lebanon turned into a parking lot again. Ask Nasrallah if he liked the new aholes Israel ripped into him after the last operation.  Baz zer zadi heyvoun?  Chos.


----------



## MJB12741 (May 6, 2013)

Oh for goodness sake, calm down Princess.  You'll give yourself a stroke or something.  Now look, we all know you are not exactly among the brightest among us but seriously I wish you well with your reading disorder.  Even the link is titled --- "Iranian Troops Attack Kurdish Camps in Iraq."  Have you not ever heard of Iraq?  Does that answer your question?




loinboy said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > First prize for the funniest comment so far on this thread goes to LoinBoy who said "Iran hasen't attacked anyone in over 200 years."  Bless you princess for all the laughs you give us.
> ...


----------



## georgephillip (May 6, 2013)

Roudy said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > MJB12741 said:
> ...


Which "Syrian People" are you helping?

"Testimony from victims of the Syrian conflict suggests rebels have used the nerve agent sarin, according to a leading United Nations investigator.

"Carla del Ponte told Swiss TV there were 'strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof'.

"However, she said her panel had not yet seen evidence of government forces using chemical weapons."

BBC News - Syria crisis: UN's Del Ponte says evidence rebels 'used sarin'

The Jewish state was created to ensure violence like what we see today from Lebanon to Libya to Syria to Boston.


----------



## georgephillip (May 6, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


I wonder if you want to know who the CIA has been arming and training since Ziggy left DC?
Sibel Edmonds has some hypothesis that seem to connect a few dots:

"With the approaching Finale for Syrias Assad the Uber-Neocon architects of US foreign policy have been hard at work. Assuming (albeit knowingly) the certainty of the soon-to-come end for Assads government, the neocon architects are drafting and crafting their objectives for the Post-Assad regime in Syria. 

"I know the mainstream and pseudo-alternative media use the term 'Neocon' loosely and willy-nilly, but I can assure you this is not the case with my usage of 'Uber-Neocons here. You will see that clearly after reading the following facts.

"Yesterday I found this interesting article in the Turkish newspaper Zaman [All Emphasis Mine]: Read more ?..."

Sibel Edmonds' Boiling Frogs Post | Home of the Irate Minority


----------



## Hossfly (May 6, 2013)

loinboy said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Israel has the right to war against thoe who attack or would attack it.
> ...


It's called "opening gambit", Spassky.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (May 6, 2013)

georgephillip said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



Boston?  Yeah, blame the Jews for everything.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (May 6, 2013)

loinboy said:


> Jeremiah said:
> 
> 
> > What war crimes?  Israel has commited no war crimes.  NONE.
> ...



Israel is liberating the Syrian people.


----------



## RoccoR (May 6, 2013)

_et al,_

The "Nuremberg principles" have long since been overtaken by events and replaced by the ICJ/ICC/ Rome Statues:  


*Reference Links:*
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court


War Crimes are defined in Part II Article 8.  



ForeverYoung436 said:


> loinboy said:
> 
> 
> > Jeremiah said:
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

However, it is difficult to charge Israel with a War Crime, in this case, when they were interceding against an International Crime in progress _(Enforcement of an Arms Embargo and U.N. Security Council ban on weapons exports by the Islamic Republic)_.

*Reference Links:* 
Sanctions Committee - 1737
UNODA - Small Arms and Light Weapons


Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip (May 6, 2013)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


Not all Jews deserve this blame.
Some do.
Like those who covet the Litani for a northern border.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (May 6, 2013)

georgephillip said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...



Let's not just throw everything into a hodgepodge and blame the "rich elites".  I don't know by what stretch of the imagination Boston can be blamed on Israel.  The Boston bomber's uncle said that those two thugs were losers, who were not able to get settled in life, so this is how they acted out their frustrations--by becoming radicals within their religion.  One of the bombers said that he wasn't able to make an American friend.  Furthermore they were Chechnyan Muslims, and their country is occupied by Russia.  Let's be clear about all this.


----------



## georgephillip (May 6, 2013)

Chechens are primarily motivated by creating an independent Muslim state free of Russian influence within their homeland. Like many Muslims world-wide they've grown up watching images on their televisions of US and Israeli military actions that have claimed the lives of hundreds of thousands of their fellow Muslims. 

It's possible the Boston bombers were acting out of frustration with what they see as US blind support for Israel's actions in Palestine, or the actions of the US military in Afghanistan or Iraq. It is for sure that uncle you mention was once married to the daughter of a CIA agent who spent much of his career in that part of the world. 

There is also a connection between Chechnya and Syria that may not get much air time in this country:

"The Boston bombing is still in the process of investigation and could have a variety of repercussions in both the short and the long run. Many of these repercussions cannot be predicted, but some can be seen. 

"One is connected with the North Caucasus jihadis' involvement in the Syrian conflict, and their relationship with the US. While several months ago the North Caucasus jihadis assumed that their participation in fighting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad would lead to total rapprochement with Washington, they are increasingly losing belief in such a development."

Asia Times Online :: Caucasus jihadis feel Boston shocks 

I only mentioned the Litani River because that has been mentioned many times as a natural northern border for the Jewish state...to complement the Jordan River (or is it the Euphrates) on the east.


----------



## Hossfly (May 6, 2013)

georgephillip said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...


Isn't Georgie Boy hilarious by saying " The Jewish state was created to ensure violence like what we see today from Lebanon to Libya to Syria to Boston. "
Wow, what a statement that only an extremist Muslim or a Jew hater like Georgie Boy would say.  Yep, his Jewish landlord probably didn't reduce his rent as he requested, but the Jewish taxpayers along with the other taxpayers in the Los Angeles area are responsible for his having a subsidized apartment.
BBC Headline Parrots Syrian Terror Charge Against Israel | HonestReporting


----------



## Hossfly (May 6, 2013)

georgephillip said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...


Would there be a problem in your mind if the CIA is arming those Rebels who are not fanatics and just want a democracy in Syria?  No doubt you would love Iran to take over because in your mixed up mind you think that Israel and the U.S. want Syria for themselves.  And, of course, even you have the smarts to realize that the leaders of Iran are crazy religious fanatics.

Iran?s Plans to Take Over Syria


----------



## georgephillip (May 6, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


Arms sales, oil sales, and laundering illegal drug profits are the top three money-makers on this planet, Hossie. Can you honestly tell me creating a Jewish State in the heart of Arab oil didn't spike the top two items on this list? Now, we have our heroic Marines and others making Afghanistan safe for opium growers, I'm sure Wall Street (and Pentagon) bonus pools will be even deeper this year.

Your link was a little light on details (imagine my surprise) but what airspace were those Israeli rockets fired from? That "contingency" planning Wesley Clark has written about seems to be falling into place. Divide and Conquer?
(Again)


----------



## georgephillip (May 6, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...


Your (excellent) link:

"It is likely that Tehran will make every effort to recruit additional Shiite elements from Iraq, the Persian Gulf, and even from Pakistan. For the Islamic Republic, this is a war of survival against a radical Sunni uprising that views Iran and the Shiites as infidels to be annihilated. 

"This is the real war being waged today, and it is within Islam. 

"From Iran&#8217;s standpoint, if the extreme Sunnis of the al-Qaeda persuasion are not defeated in Syria, they will assert themselves in Iraq and threaten to take over the Persian Gulf, posing a real danger to Iran&#8217;s regional hegemony. 

"Khamenei does not intend to give in. Hizbullah&#8217;s readiness to fight shoulder-to-shoulder with Iran against the radical Sunnis could shatter the delicate internal order upon which the Lebanese state is based and bring about a Hizbullah take-over of Lebanon in its entirety."

Are those voices in your head going.....oh nooooz Hizbollah and Iran! Time for the US and Israel to pack up all those damn aircraft carriers, nuclear powered submarines and missiles, and beat a hasty retreat to Haiti? If Iran recovers part of that 35th district after Assad carves out his enclave along the Alawite coast, and the rest of Syria decomposes into Libya, who is likely to profit most from the misery that comes next? Those in the west getting rich from arms and oil sales, maybe?

There is a real war being waged today within Islam, but it's not the main event.

Wesley Clark laid that one out ten years ago.


----------



## Hossfly (May 6, 2013)

georgephillip said:


> Chechens are primarily motivated by creating an independent Muslim state free of Russian influence within their homeland. Like many Muslims world-wide they've grown up watching images on their televisions of US and Israeli military actions that have claimed the lives of hundreds of thousands of their fellow Muslims.
> 
> It's possible the Boston bombers were acting out of frustration with what they see as US blind support for Israel's actions in Palestine, or the actions of the US military in Afghanistan or Iraq. It is for sure that uncle you mention was once married to the daughter of a CIA agent who spent much of his career in that part of the world.
> 
> ...


Now that you have finished your blabbering about Chechens, let the viewers listen to this video, which is so on the mark.  You, Georgie Boy, who can't seem to stop speaking about money, should be angry at what these two bombers and their family received.  I would rather that a fellow like you had been given the opportunity that they were given.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AkzNL69L_h0]Judge Jeanine Pirro Slams Jihadi Mom: "Lady, You Shouldn't Be Allowed Here" Opening Stmt - 4-27-13 - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Billo_Really (May 6, 2013)

MJB12741 said:


> Oh for goodness sake, calm down Princess.  You'll give yourself a stroke or something.  Now look, we all know you are not exactly among the brightest among us but seriously I wish you well with your reading disorder.  Even the link is titled --- "Iranian Troops Attack Kurdish Camps in Iraq."  Have you not ever heard of Iraq?  Does that answer your question?


It's not the same thing, you dumbass!

Did you miss this part of your article?



> _The Iranian military offensive is targeting bases controlled by the Free Life Party of Kurdistan (PJAK),* the largest and best-organized Iranian opposition group currently operating inside Iran*._


So they weren't Kurdish camps; they were rebel camps in the Kurdistan province of Iraq.   Even so, the border crossing was technically illegal according to international law, because Iran wasn't attacked by Kurdish forces.  However, Iran was attacked repeatedly from this opposition group (terrorists).   The point is, Iran's response wasn't _"un--provoked aggression", _like the Israeli's.  They were attacked first.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 6, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> It's called "opening gambit", Spassky.


No, it's called a_* "war of aggression", *_which Israel is trying to start.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 6, 2013)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Israel is liberating the Syrian people.


They musta been inspired by our liberation of Libyan's.


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (May 6, 2013)

loinboy said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > It's called "opening gambit", Spassky.
> ...



Its an act of aggression and its a war crime and Israel killed 42 Syrian soldiers and some countries are trying to get the UN to do something about it.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 6, 2013)

RoccoR said:


> _et al,_
> 
> The "Nuremberg principles" have long since been overtaken by events and replaced by the ICJ/ICC/ Rome Statues:
> 
> ...


Member states of the UN cannot act uni-laterally on their own militarily against a sovereign nation, they need UNSC approval to do that.

And there are no laws that allow wars of aggression, the Nuremberg Principles were not over-turned.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 6, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> Its an act of aggression and its a war crime and Israel killed 42 Syrian soldiers and some countries are trying to get the UN to do something about it.


You're right!

Thank you for the correction.

Once again, I've proven I got the balls to admit when I'm wrong and I'm willing to wager that is the "smallest" minority group at this website.  I personally, have only seen about a half-dozen people admit when they were wrong.  And it's not because they were right, it's because they were pussy's.​


----------



## MHunterB (May 6, 2013)

Erdo?an says Assad will surely pay price of Banias massacre

Yeah, those sweet innocent Syrian government troops.....


----------



## Hossfly (May 6, 2013)

MHunterB said:


> Erdo?an says Assad will surely pay price of Banias massacre
> 
> Yeah, those sweet innocent Syrian government troops.....


Assad Carries Out Carnage In Banias  OpEd 
Assad Carries Out Carnage In Banias - OpEd Eurasia Review


----------



## MJB12741 (May 6, 2013)

"An act of aggression"???  Try sending Iranian missiles to our radical Islamic enemies right here in the USA & see what we do.





SherriMunnerlyn said:


> loinboy said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2013)

MJB12741 said:


> "An act of aggression"???  Try sending Iranian missiles to our radical Islamic enemies right here in the USA & see what we do.


I like how you consider that wrong (which, I do to), but you're perfectly okay with the US sending arms to al Qaeda cells in Syria, or arms shipments to Israel so they can launch un-provoked "acts of aggression" against their neighbors.

It's okay for Israel to wipe out a weapons depot in Syria in spite of the fact that they weren't attacked (or even threatened) by these weapons, but it is not okay for Iran to launch an attack against rebels that _did_ attack them first.

The one type of person I hate more than any other, is a fuckin' hypocrite!

And you, are a fuckin' hypocrite, big-time!


----------



## Lipush (May 7, 2013)

No missiles for Hezbollah.....

Bummer!

lol.


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (May 7, 2013)

loinboy said:


> SherriMunnerlyn said:
> 
> 
> > Its an act of aggression and its a war crime and Israel killed 42 Syrhttp://mondoweiss.net/2013/05/explosions-damascus-earthquake.htmlttp://mondoweiss.net/2013/05/explosions-damascus-earthquake.htmlan soldiers and some countries are trying to get the UN to do something about it.
> ...


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (May 7, 2013)

Lipush said:


> No missiles for Hezbollah.....
> 
> Bummer!
> 
> lol.



No chickens, either!


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> I was not intending to correct you...


Now, now, now, an "act", is not a "war".  It is what it is.  The fact that I used it for my own personal gain as a set-up to another point, doesn't make it any less epic.  I mean, how many posts have you seen by others where they admitted they were wrong on an issue, without being sarcastic or disengenous?  For me, in over 8 years of blogging, I can't think of more than a half-dozen instances (out of the over 50,000 posts I've read) where this has happened.

So I over-exaggerated my error.  It was worth it to trash those who are so rightous in   making ridiculous statements, like bombing Syria was actually "defending" Israel.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2013)

Lipush said:


> No missiles for Hezbollah.....
> 
> Bummer!
> 
> lol.


Their goal wasn't keeping missles from reaching Hezbollah.

Israel is trying to drag my country into this conflict because it ain't got the chops to go up against Russia on its own.


----------



## RoccoR (May 7, 2013)

loinboy, _et al,_

Let me get this straight.



loinboy said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > _et al,_
> ...


*(COMMENT)*


You are advocating for the Assad Government.  
You want to obstruct Israel from destroying illicit weapons, being used to suppress the people from exercising their right of self-determination.
You want to further the cause of the Ba'athist Regime against its own people.

You are suggesting that the Israelis are waging a "war of aggression."  What is the Israeli motive?

territorial gain? 
subjugation?
military conquest?

Where is the Article 39 Action by the UN?  (Determination of Aggression)

No, I think your argument has a hidden agenda.  You are supporting action to strip the people of Syria of any support against a repressive regime that they would like to change.  You support Hezbollah, which supports the Assad Government; both of which are supported by Iran.

The "Nuremberg Principles" were replaced by a modern set of law and codes.  They represent a set of legal precedence; as all old legal principles and practices do; but, are not the system in use today.

The "Wars of Aggression" are hostile actions taken by one side or the other for some purpose and benefit that could not be achieved though some peaceful means.  

*EXAMPLE:*  The 1973 Yom Kipper War, was a "War of Aggression" to conquer and destroy the State of Israel, which they could not achieve through other means.  It was a "sneak attack" by Egypt and Syria _(including Expeditionary Forces from Iraq and Jordan)_.  The purpose was to secure territorial gain and institute a regime change.​
The "War of Aggression" terminology is "Cold War" language of the 20th Century dogma.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip (May 7, 2013)

Rocco...was the US invasion of Iraq legal under today's code?
What about the US invasion of South Vietnam (or Korea)?


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2013)

RoccoR said:


> The "Nuremberg principles" have long since been overtaken by events and replaced by the ICJ/ICC/ Rome Statues:


But they weren't overturned or repealed, a "war of aggression" is still outlawed according to international law.  There are no laws that make it legal. 





RoccoR said:


> You are advocating for the Assad Government.


I'm saying Israel committed an un-provoked act of aggression, this has nothing to do with the Assad government.




RoccoR said:


> You want to obstruct Israel from destroying illicit weapons, being used to suppress the people from exercising their right of self-determination.


Israel has no right destroying anything that did not attack them first.




RoccoR said:


> You want to further the cause of the Ba'athist Regime against its own people.



No.  My country has been at war for 10 years and I don't won't to be involved in another one.  And I'm also getting sick of these war-mongering Israeli's.  I wish they would pick a fight with Russia.  Israeli's don't deserve a country.




RoccoR said:


> You are suggesting that the Israelis are waging a "war of aggression."  What is the Israeli motive?
> 
> territorial gain?
> subjugation?
> military conquest?


Their motive is to drag the US into this conflict because they can't take on Russia by themselves, or they'll get their ass kicked.




RoccoR said:


> Where is the Article 39 Action by the UN?  (Determination of Aggression)


If you need someone telling you how wrong it is to attack someone that did not attack you first, then you've lost all sense of morality.




RoccoR said:


> No, I think your argument has a hidden agenda.  You are supporting action to strip the people of Syria of any support against a repressive regime that they would like to change.  You support Hezbollah, which supports the Assad Government; both of which are supported by Iran.


I don't give a shit about the people of Syria and neither do you.  I do care about a conflict that could lead to a direct military confrontation with Russia that if carried to the extreme, would result in the extinction of all life on planet earth.




RoccoR said:


> The "Nuremberg Principles" were replaced by a modern set of law and codes.  They represent a set of legal precedence; as all old legal principles and practices do; but, are not the system in use today.


But they weren't repealed, "aggression" is still illegal.




RoccoR said:


> The "Wars of Aggression" are hostile actions taken by one side or the other for some purpose and benefit that could not be achieved though some peaceful means.


A war of aggression is the worst crime a nation can commit. 



> _A war of aggression, sometimes also war of conquest, *is a military conflict waged without the justification of self-defense*, usually for territorial gain and subjugation. The phrase is distinctly modern and diametrically opposed to the prior legal international standard of "might makes right", under the medieval and pre-historic beliefs of right of conquest. Since the Korean War of the early 1950s, waging such a war of aggression is a crime under the customary international law.  _


Nothing has made that legal.




RoccoR said:


> *EXAMPLE:*  The 1973 Yom Kipper War, was a "War of Aggression" to conquer and destroy the State of Israel, which they could not achieve through other means.  It was a "sneak attack" by Egypt and Syria _(including Expeditionary Forces from Iraq and Jordan)_.  The purpose was to secure territorial gain and institute a regime change.​


Israel has started the last 6 wars they've been in.




RoccoR said:


> The "War of Aggression" terminology is "Cold War" language of the 20th Century dogma.


The Cold War was about deterrence, not aggression.  The US and Soviet Union never had a battle against each other.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (May 7, 2013)

loinboy said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > The "Nuremberg principles" have long since been overtaken by events and replaced by the ICJ/ICC/ Rome Statues:
> ...





Well, at least you're being honest when you say that you don't give a shit about the people of Syria.  I, for one, always root for the underdog in a fight.  Must be that "David and Goliath" story I learned in Hebrew school as a kid.  Then why don't I support the Palestinian "David" against the Goliath "Israel"?  Because I view the Palestinians as being part of the Goliath Arab Empire as a whole.  I don't get why your heart bleeds for Palestinian Arab farmers and fishermen but not Syrian Arab carpenters and shoemakers.  Why do you give a shit about the Palestinian people?


----------



## MJB12741 (May 7, 2013)

Just curious.  Are you an American?  If so, why do you stay here &  daily suffer in misery with all those Zionists in the USA when you can go live in Gaza?  And you won't even have to pay taxes to Israel anymore.  Heh Heh.






loinboy said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > "An act of aggression"???  Try sending Iranian missiles to our radical Islamic enemies right here in the USA & see what we do.
> ...


----------



## toastman (May 7, 2013)

loinboy said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> > No missiles for Hezbollah.....
> ...



YOUR country makes its own decision on weather to go to war or not. Stop with the conspiracy theories


----------



## MJB12741 (May 7, 2013)

Isn't it interesting how Israel's greatest enemies like loinboy are also America's greatest enemies?





toastman said:


> loinboy said:
> 
> 
> > Lipush said:
> ...


----------



## Hossfly (May 7, 2013)

loinboy said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > "An act of aggression"???  Try sending Iranian missiles to our radical Islamic enemies right here in the USA & see what we do.
> ...


The mere presence of the weapons in that depot were a threat because of their proximity to Israel. Get real or get lost.


----------



## toastman (May 7, 2013)

Isn't there a conspiracy section here for people like loinboy to stars thread about how Israel is responsible for everything bad in the Middle East


----------



## Roudy (May 7, 2013)

RoccoR said:


> loinboy, _et al,_
> 
> Let me get this straight.
> 
> ...


Rocco, I really admire your trying figure these lunatics out by spending all this time on an elegant, intelligent response, but its really very simple with them.  Everything they say and do evolves around one thing....HATRED OF JEWS. As a result nothing Israel does can be right, even when it targets the armaments of a genocidal tyrant that has killed over 100,000 of his own people.


----------



## Lipush (May 7, 2013)

loinboy said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> > No missiles for Hezbollah.....
> ...



You're an idiot!

Yes, their goals was trying to keep those missiles from Hezbollah's hands! And they suceeded this! thank God.

And Israel doesn't try to drag USA into anything! the attack was by Israeli hands, not involving your country in anyway!

In fact, it only shows people like you, who whine about Israel's "attempt" to drag USA into Syria, that you're wrong and badly  so! these attacks show nothing but that we take our fate in our own hands! and not waiting for you! since you obviously prefer that those missiles will reach Hezbollah.

Yes, Obama is making himself look like a chicken. while he fills his mouth water, Netanyahu makes sure his civilians are protected.

Well done, indeed well done!


----------



## RoccoR (May 7, 2013)

_et al,_

No matter who does what to whom, the White House needs to keep a very tight leash on DOD, DOS, and the CIA.  We don't want to get involved.  We are very bad at this, especially with the current leadership we have.

If this were such a big deal, and the death count actually meant something in the Arab world, then the Arabs _(who have put together armies in the past to attack Israel)_ could send a relief column to Syria.  But I don't think this is such a big deal to the Arabs.  They will sit back and do nothing, --- watching America get sucked-in, as if we could make a difference.

The US needs to put as much distance as it can between Syria and anything that could draw us into to yet another political-military failure.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (May 7, 2013)

toastman said:


> Isn't there a conspiracy section here for people like loinboy to stars thread about how Israel is responsible for everything bad in the Middle East



Speaking truth has nothing to do with spouting conspiracy theories. People who cannot face the truth call it conspiracy.


----------



## MJB12741 (May 7, 2013)

Oh yes, the truth Sherri, the truth.  And the truth is NO MISSILES FOR HEZBOLLAH.  God I love the truth, don't you?




SherriMunnerlyn said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Isn't there a conspiracy section here for people like loinboy to stars thread about how Israel is responsible for everything bad in the Middle East
> ...


----------



## georgephillip (May 7, 2013)

RoccoR said:


> _et al,_
> 
> No matter who does what to whom, the White House needs to keep a very tight leash on DOD, DOS, and the CIA.  We don't want to get involved.  We are very bad at this, especially with the current leadership we have.
> 
> ...


Rocco...does any of this sound credible to you?

"According to a recent report of the *Israeli Intelligence News Service Debka:* 

&#8220;US troops sent to the Jordan-Syria border are helping build a headquarters in Jordan to bolster its military capabilities in case violence spills over from Syria, suggesting deepening US military intervention in the Syrian conflict.&#8221;

"The deployment of allied troops on Syria&#8217;s southern border is coordinated with actions taken by Turkey and its allies on Syria&#8217;s Northern border. 

"Meanwhile, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu has demanded the support of NATO against Syria under the doctrine of collective security.'We will do what needs to be done if our border is violated again,' he told reporters on October 13.

"Foreign Minister Davutoglu pointed to the alleged violation of Turkey&#8217;s border by Syria as a violation of NATO&#8217;s borders. Under  Article 5 of the Washington Treaty, an attack on one member state of the Atlantic Alliance is considered as an attack against all NATO member states."

Are you familiar with Debka?
Article 5???

The War on Lebanon and the Battle for Oil | Global Research


----------



## RoccoR (May 7, 2013)

georgephillip; _et al,_

Some of it makes sense.  *DEBKA LINK: --->* DEBKAfile, Political Analysis, Espionage, Terrorism, Security  ...  I am very familiar with it.



georgephillip said:


> Rocco...does any of this sound credible to you?
> 
> "According to a recent report of the *Israeli Intelligence News Service Debka:*
> 
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

If there is one thing that the US Military is known for - is it's C3ISR _(Command, Control, Communication, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance)_.  We build the best TIC/TOC-FDCs _(Tactical Intelligence Center/Tactical Operations Center - Fire Direction Coordination Center)_ in the world.  They are all-source and joint force capable.  They see everything, hear everything, and control everything.  Together, with the Red & Blue Force Tracking, they give Regional Commanders the ability to have a common operational picture that can be shared across the board.



			
				Article 5 said:
			
		

> The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
> 
> Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.
> 
> *SOURCE:* NATO - Official text: The North Atlantic Treaty, 04-Apr.-1949



My hope is that someone doesn't trip this defense pact.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip (May 7, 2013)

Rocco...there's a map on page 7 of this link that portrays a "New Middle East."
If I'm reading it correctly, Israel is shown with its pre-1967 borders.
I don't have the expertise to display it directly in one of my posts.
I suspect you do.


----------



## RoccoR (May 7, 2013)

georgephillip,  _et al,_

This is based on an analysis that is seven years old, comprised of (mostly OSINT) that is even older.



georgephillip said:


> Rocco...there's a map on page 7 of this link that portrays a "New Middle East."
> If I'm reading it correctly, Israel is shown with its pre-1967 borders.
> I don't have the expertise to display it directly in one of my posts.
> I suspect you do.


*(FOR GEORGE)*




v/r
R


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (May 7, 2013)

MJB12741 said:


> Oh yes, the truth Sherri, the truth.  And the truth is NO MISSILES FOR HEZBOLLAH.  God I love the truth, don't you?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That Israeli attack had absolutely nothing to do with keeping missiles from Hezbollah!


----------



## MJB12741 (May 7, 2013)

Well why then?  Did the Israelis just wake up in the morning & ask themselves, who can we bomb today?





SherriMunnerlyn said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > Oh yes, the truth Sherri, the truth.  And the truth is NO MISSILES FOR HEZBOLLAH.  God I love the truth, don't you?
> ...


----------



## georgephillip (May 7, 2013)

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip; _et al,_
> 
> Some of it makes sense.  *DEBKA LINK: --->* DEBKAfile, Political Analysis, Espionage, Terrorism, Security  ...  I am very familiar with it.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the help with that map, Rocco.
In regards to your hope the someone doesn't trip over NATO:

"Israel&#8217;s Binyamin Netanyahu, while in Shanghai, faced a sharp dressing-down from President Vladimir Putin Monday, May 6 and a warning that further Israeli attacks on Damascus would not be tolerated.  Putin said highly advanced Russian weapons, including S-300 air defense systems, would be supplied at speed to Syria. 

"US Secretary of State John Kerry, on his arrival in Moscow, was met with Russia&#8217;s determination to match US-Israel intervention in the Syrian war. And Netanyahu was greeted in Beijing by Chinese President Xi Jinping&#8217;s pro-Palestinian &#8220;peace." 

Do you think most of the above is for domestic consumption, or are we heading into a potential Guns of August scenario?

DEBKAfile, Political Analysis, Espionage, Terrorism, Security


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2013)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Well, at least you're being honest when you say that you don't give a shit about the people of Syria.  I, for one, always root for the underdog in a fight.  Must be that "David and Goliath" story I learned in Hebrew school as a kid.  Then why don't I support the Palestinian "David" against the Goliath "Israel"?  Because I view the Palestinians as being part of the Goliath Arab Empire as a whole.  I don't get why your heart bleeds for Palestinian Arab farmers and fishermen but not Syrian Arab carpenters and shoemakers.  Why do you give a shit about the Palestinian people?


I don't.  I don't give a shit about them either!  Why should I care about things that have no impact in my daily life?  I live on the other side of the planet and have no stake in either side.  I have nothing to gain, nor anything to lose in this conflict.

I just enjoy making people (who try to bullshit me) miserable.


----------



## RoccoR (May 7, 2013)

georgephillip; _et al,_

No, not for domestic consumption.



georgephillip said:


> "Israels Binyamin Netanyahu, while in Shanghai, faced a sharp dressing-down from President Vladimir Putin Monday, May 6 and a warning that further Israeli attacks on Damascus would not be tolerated.  Putin said highly advanced Russian weapons, including S-300 air defense systems, would be supplied at speed to Syria.
> 
> "US Secretary of State John Kerry, on his arrival in Moscow, was met with Russias determination to match US-Israel intervention in the Syrian war. And Netanyahu was greeted in Beijing by Chinese President Xi Jinpings pro-Palestinian peace."
> 
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Neither the US nor Russia wants a major confrontation.  

A NATO engagement under Article 5 (NATO) and Article 51 (UN), triggered by Syria, could bring that about inadvertently.   

The US powers-that-be, who want to be an active player in the evolution of the post-Syrian Civil War, see an opportunity to become an influence in the region, on the side of the Arab People; possibly starting a change in the US reputation. 

While the US and Russians see this as a proxy 'v' proxy (Israel 'v' Syrian) contest, the instigator is Iran.  Iran wants to destabilize the region that will provide their proxy (Hezbollah) a greater influence.  If, by Iran supply munitions/rockets, to the Assad Government via the IRGC-QF portal maintained by their proxy, they can dangle a set of lucrative targets for Israel to exploit.   The Iranian hope is that Russia will then be forced to increase its support to the Assad Regime in response to increased Israeli intervention.  This, in turn, triggers the US to escalate its involvement.  It becomes a cascade failure - profit through chaos.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## MJB12741 (May 7, 2013)

Yep.  Iran is the catalist that has something to gain.  Unless of course Israel decides to pay Iran a little visit to change their thinking.  Let us hope.




RoccoR said:


> georgephillip; _et al,_
> 
> No, not for domestic consumption.
> 
> ...


----------



## Billo_Really (May 8, 2013)

RoccoR said:


> Neither the US nor Russia wants a major confrontation.


Who would, when you consider the potential consequences?

But the fact remains, Syria is where Russia has drawn the line in the sand.

They are on record as saying they will not allow Syria to fall into NATO's sphere of influence.  And just to drive the point home, they've got two warships parked in Syrian ports and they ain't leaving.  They're also conducting large scale war games in that area, which caught Administration officials by surprise.  We knew they were going to be staging military exercises, but we didn't know it was going to be that large of an operation.

Russia is flexing its muscles and not too many people are catching this clue.  It's only a matter of time before one of these Israeli air-strikes hits Russian anti-aircraft batteries, radar installations or Russian troops guarding weapons storages.  And if that happens, it won't be missles from Hezbollah Israel will be worrying about.


----------



## georgephillip (May 8, 2013)

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip; _et al,_
> 
> No, not for domestic consumption.
> 
> ...


Rocco...it seems to me Syria is not the only finger on this trigger:

"The Anglo-American Petroleum Agreement of 1944 was based on negotiations between the United States and Britain over the control of Middle Eastern oil. Below is shown what the American President Franklin D. Roosevelt had in mind for to a British Ambassador in 1944:

"*Persian oil &#8230;is yours. We share the oil of Iraq and Kuwait. As for Saudi Arabian oil, it&#8217;s ours*.[6]

"On August 8, 1944, the Anglo-American Petroleum Agreement was signed, dividing Middle Eastern oil between the United States and Britain..."

Has the time arrived for some Persian payback in Greater Lebanon?

"By the end of the Second World War, the United States had come to consider the Middle East region as &#8216;the most strategically important area of the world&#8217;.[9] and &#8216;&#8230;one of the greatest material prizes in world history&#8217;.[9] 

"For that reason, it was not until around the period of the Second World War that America became directly involved in the Middle East region. At this time the region was going through great social, economic and political changes and as a result, internally the Middle East region was in turmoil. 

"Politically, the Middle East was experiencing an *upsurge in the popularity of nationalistic politics* and an increase in the number of nationalistic political groups across the region, which was *causing great trouble for the English and French colonial powers*."

American intervention in the Middle East - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Does the US qualify as a colonial power in the Middle East today?


----------



## georgephillip (May 8, 2013)

loinboy said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Neither the US nor Russia wants a major confrontation.
> ...


"The July Crisis was a diplomatic crisis among the major powers of Europe in the summer of 1914 that led to the First World War. Immediately after Gavrilo Princip, a Bosnian Serb nationalist, assassinated Archduke Franz Ferdinand, heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne, in Sarajevo, a series of diplomatic maneuverings led to an ultimatum from Austria-Hungary to Serbia, and ultimately to war."

History repeats...


----------



## MJB12741 (May 8, 2013)

WWlll has already started.  The civilized nations Vs. radical Islamist countries.




georgephillip said:


> loinboy said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


----------



## RoccoR (May 8, 2013)

loinboy, georgephillip, MJB12741, _et al,_

*(PREFACE)*

Syria is something different depending on the perspective held by the observer.  

The Rebels see themselves as the people that are governed by their consent, and which to change the nature of government and the relationship they have experienced over nearly half a century.  The want to depose the dictatorial like government and replace it with a government that is more benevolent and responsive to the needs of the people.

The Assad Government sees themselves as the rightful government, over a people that, as of yet, have not attained the prerequisites which are essential and necessary to govern themselves.  The Assad Government perceives themselves as the holder of the intrinsic knowledge, skills, and abilities to maintain the continuity of government and the critical services and diplomacy to maintain the integrity of the state.

The Russians see Syria as both an economic and diplomatic investment into an alliance that is one of their major footholds in the region; a platform which holds the center of their regional influence.  The Assad government is a known quantity to them, and something with which they have learned to accomodate.  Any new government by the people becomes an unknown quantity which they may find less amenable to their proposals.

The Israelis see with a binocular view.  Syria _(the Assad Government)_ as a member of the Arab League, a dictatorship, a member of the alliance that helps form a coalition to the detriment of Israeli territorial sovereignty.  It sees the government as a hostile entity that supports the aggressive intentions of the Palestinians and their Islamic State comradeship.  But it see the people _(Rebel Forces)_ as a new and emerging dynamic to could change the paradigm altogether, from a hostile relationship to one of a cooperative neighbor.  It sees a Rebels takeover as potential for advancement and a condition that might foster a new working relationship between the two nations.

Iran sees Syria _(Assad Government)_ as a lucrative alliance member that has assisted the Islamic State in the extension of their influence in asymmetric approaches to destabilize the region.  Iran sees no benefit in the security stabilization of the region, as in the chaos it allows them the opportunity to expand their foothold that would normally be beyond their reach.  Iran sees the Assad Government as an essential ally, and sees the fall of the Assad Government into the hands of the people that just might choose a more democratic form of government as --- diametrically opposed to their goals and intentions.   Thus, the more discord, the better in their view.

The Arab League and Turkey see the turmoil in Syria as a extension of the Arab Spring uprising that does nothing to improve stability, and threatens regional security; compounding already present ethnic disturbances in the region.

Hezbollah is a quasi-proxy, under the influence but not control, of Iran _(yet)_.  Hezbollah has had a long standing relationship with the Assad Government dating back to its inception.  It is not an ally of the People of Syria, but of the Assad Government.  And it sees the fall of the Assad Government as the loss of a critical ally in its bid for the control of Lebanon and the continued struggle against Israel.  Hezbollah has made its bed, and sided against the Rebels.  So, if the Assad Government falls, the reputation of Hezbollah with the new government may be less than cordial.  

The al-Qaeda Element _(almost a generic name, the US damn near calls everybody al-Qaeda, you have to look as the history to see where it got its label)_ is the Joker in the deck.  It expects the Rebel Forces to win their bid against the government, and wants to repair and establish a positive relationship with the new government _(Rebel Forces)_ which is something they don't have with the existing leadership _(the Assad Government)_.  

NATO/OTAN is the Wild Card in the deck.  It has remained relatively quiet, and really doesn't want to do anything to drag it into the conflict/civil war.  But it is a card in play and Turkey has it in their hand.​
*(COMMENT)*

No one on the side of the Assad Government wants NATO/OTAN drawn into the fray.  It would spell the end of the Assad Government.  And Russia does not want to challenge NATO/OTAN at this time.  It would be expensive and very messy.  Nor does Russia want to created the conditions that the Rebel Forces, which may come into control of the nation, view Russia a negative light.  

The US is broke and the military has not fully recovered.  It has spent its money on the unsuccessful campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan.  The people of the US don't want to be dragged into another war in which the Arabs bite the hand that feeds them; casting a dark shadow on US participation and further smearing the reputation of America.  But the US finds it appealing that the Assad Regime might fall to a populace movement.  Clearly, the US is attempting to rally support elsewhere in the Arab League to assist the Rebel Forces.

The Assad Government, taking a lesson from Libya and Egypt, does not want to end up like Moammar Khadafy or Hosni Mubarak.  So the struggle to retain power is going to be ferocious.  

Israel and the US are in an information and intelligence shadow.  The UN has suggested that the Rebel Forces had used Chemical Weapons (CW), while the Israel Intelligence has suggest that Assad has used CW.   The real critical nature here is that if the Rebels Forces have CW, that means that the jihadis might have access to those same CWs.  It has been estimated that 1 in 10 of the Rebels are some sort of Islamists.  Having said that, everyone is quick to remind us all that not all Islamists there are Salafists, and not all Salafists are al-Qaeda.  But al-Qaeda and its affiliates have very strong representation on the Syrian-held side of the Golan Heights.  

This is a mess.  And the US needs to stay as far away from it as it possibly can.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## MJB12741 (May 8, 2013)

I understand your thinking here in your analysis.  However I am not convinced a rebel win over the government of Assad would benefit either Israel or the USA.  Let us not forget one of the major forces in the rebel movement is Al-Qaeda.





RoccoR said:


> loinboy, georgephillip, MJB12741, _et al,_
> 
> *(PREFACE)*
> 
> ...


----------



## georgephillip (May 8, 2013)

Some in the US Army seem anxious to get involved:

"Gen. Ray Odierno, Army chief of staff, warned that planned training cutbacks due to the sequester meant that if the Obama administration wanted to give the green light for intervention it would have to act quickly.

&#8220;Readiness is OK right now, but it&#8217;s degrading significantly because our training is reducing. So, the next three, four months, we probably have the capability to do it,&#8221; he said, adding, &#8220;Next year, it becomes a little bit more risky.&#8221;

"Odierno made it clear that the longer it took to make the decision, the less likely the US is to intervene.

&#8220;'If you ask me today, we have forces that can go. I think it will change over time because the longer we go canceling training and reducing our training, the readiness levels go down,' he said.

"Odierno also praised FSA rebels, the majority of whom have pledged allegiance to and are being led by Al-Qaeda terrorists, for their fighting capabilities and said it was not a matter of if but when they claimed victory."

» US Army Chief Suggests Military Intervention in Syria Before End of Summer Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

We've been intervening in the Middle East since Ike was in the White House.
It seems to me NATO will do the heavy lifting in Syria.
And then on to Iran?


----------



## toastman (May 8, 2013)

georgephillip said:


> Some in the US Army seem anxious to get involved:
> 
> "Gen. Ray Odierno, Army chief of staff, warned that planned training cutbacks due to the sequester meant that if the Obama administration wanted to give the green light for intervention it would have to act quickly.
> 
> ...



Being the superpower of the world comes with super responsibilities


----------



## georgephillip (May 8, 2013)

To Exxon or BP?


----------



## Billo_Really (May 8, 2013)

RoccoR said:


> loinboy, georgephillip, MJB12741, _et al,_
> 
> *(PREFACE)*
> 
> ...


We are funding (and providing material support) to al Qaeda cells in Syria!

For 10 years we've been told al Qaeda is our enemy; in Syria, they're our ally!

None of this is making sense.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 8, 2013)

MJB12741 said:


> WWlll has already started.  The civilized nations Vs. radical Islamist countries.


Name one Islamic country that has nuclear weapons.

Just one!

The truth is, you push this war to take attention away from all the fucked things Israel is doing to it's neighbors with its military.


----------



## RoccoR (May 8, 2013)

loinboy, georgephillip, MJB12741, _et al,_

I did not say that at all.



loinboy said:


> We are funding (and providing material support) to al Qaeda cells in Syria!
> 
> For 10 years we've been told al Qaeda is our enemy; in Syria, they're our ally!
> 
> None of this is making sense.


*(COMMENT)*

What did I say that lead you to that conclusion?

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Hossfly (May 8, 2013)

loinboy said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > WWlll has already started.  The civilized nations Vs. radical Islamist countries.
> ...


Surely you must know that Pakistan is a Muslim country.  And we certainly don't know what Iran is hiding by now.  Why not research what they have.  By the way, may I ask you a question.  When you are sitting on your regular barstool, do you blurt out "f@@k this and f@@k that because it seems you can rarely get through a post without that particular vulgarity.


----------



## MJB12741 (May 8, 2013)

"The Israelis see with a binocular view. Syria (the Assad Government) as a member of the Arab League, a dictatorship, a member of the alliance that helps form a coalition to the detriment of Israeli territorial sovereignty. It sees the government as a hostile entity that supports the aggressive intentions of the Palestinians and their Islamic State comradeship. But it see the people (Rebel Forces) as a new and emerging dynamic to could change the paradigm altogether, from a hostile relationship to one of a cooperative neighbor. It sees a Rebels takeover as potential for advancement and a condition that might foster a new working relationship between the two nations."







RoccoR said:


> loinboy, georgephillip, MJB12741, _et al,_
> 
> I did not say that at all.
> 
> ...


----------



## RoccoR (May 8, 2013)

MJB12741, _et al,_

Yes.  I said this.  How does this lead to the US providing some sort of material support to al-Qaeda?



MJB12741 said:


> "The Israelis see with a binocular view. Syria (the Assad Government) as a member of the Arab League, a dictatorship, a member of the alliance that helps form a coalition to the detriment of Israeli territorial sovereignty. It sees the government as a hostile entity that supports the aggressive intentions of the Palestinians and their Islamic State comradeship. But it see the people (Rebel Forces) as a new and emerging dynamic to could change the paradigm altogether, from a hostile relationship to one of a cooperative neighbor. It sees a Rebels takeover as potential for advancement and a condition that might foster a new working relationship between the two nations."
> 
> 
> 
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

I was unaware that we were providing either side with any material support of any consequence.

That decision hasn't been made yet.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## MJB12741 (May 8, 2013)

As an American, if I were the president I assure you the USA would not send any materials or show any support whatsoever to either side in Syria's internal affairs.  





RoccoR said:


> MJB12741, _et al,_
> 
> Yes.  I said this.  How does this lead to the US providing some sort of material support to al-Qaeda?
> 
> ...


----------



## Hossfly (May 9, 2013)

MJB12741 said:


> As an American, if I were the president I assure you the USA would not send any materials or show any support whatsoever to either side in Syria's internal affairs.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Just today, only for humanitarian relief.

U.S. Announces Additional Humanitarian Assistance in Response to the Syrian Crisis


Where it is used.


Crisis in Syria | U.S. Agency for International Development


----------



## Billo_Really (May 9, 2013)

RoccoR said:


> What did I say that lead you to that conclusion?


You said this...


RoccoR said:


> The Rebels see themselves as the people that are governed by their consent...


...and I just wanted to remind you that you are talking about al Qaeda.

Those "Rebels" are not "the people", they are al Qaeda cells.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 9, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> Surely you must know that Pakistan is a Muslim country.  And we certainly don't know what Iran is hiding by now.  Why not research what they have.  By the way, may I ask you a question.  When you are sitting on your regular barstool, do you blurt out "f@@k this and f@@k that because it seems you can rarely get through a post without that particular vulgarity.


Pakistan is Hindu.


----------



## Hossfly (May 9, 2013)

loinboy said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Surely you must know that Pakistan is a Muslim country.  And we certainly don't know what Iran is hiding by now.  Why not research what they have.  By the way, may I ask you a question.  When you are sitting on your regular barstool, do you blurt out "f@@k this and f@@k that because it seems you can rarely get through a post without that particular vulgarity.
> ...


What sect of Islam is Hindu, Captain Knowledge? Just curious.

Religions in Pakistan


----------



## toastman (May 9, 2013)

loinboy said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Surely you must know that Pakistan is a Muslim country.  And we certainly don't know what Iran is hiding by now.  Why not research what they have.  By the way, may I ask you a question.  When you are sitting on your regular barstool, do you blurt out "f@@k this and f@@k that because it seems you can rarely get through a post without that particular vulgarity.
> ...




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

* Islamic Republic of Pakistan*


----------



## georgephillip (May 9, 2013)

RoccoR said:


> loinboy, georgephillip, MJB12741, _et al,_
> 
> I did not say that at all.
> 
> ...


Actually it does make $en$e if you consider the possibility of a New World Order that feels the need to redraw the map of the Middle East that was inflicted upon Jew and Arab alike at the conclusion of the War to End All War$.

From 2006:

"*Militarization of the Eastern Mediterranean*

"The bombing of Lebanon is part of a carefully planned and coordinated military road map. The extension of the war into Syria and Iran has already been contemplated by US and Israeli military planners. 

"This broader military agenda is intimately related to strategic oil and oil pipelines. It is supported by the Western oil giants which control the pipeline corridors. In the context of the war on Lebanon, it *seeks Israeli territorial control over the East Mediterranean coastline*.

"In this context, the BTC pipeline dominated by British Petroleum, has dramatically changed the geopolitics of the Eastern Mediterranean, which is now linked , through an energy corridor, to the Caspian sea basin:

 '[The BTC pipeline] considerably changes the status of the regions countries and cements a new pro-West alliance. Having taken the pipeline to the Mediterranean, Washington has practically set up a new bloc with *Azerbaijan, Georgia, Turkey and Israel*,'  (Komerzant, Moscow, 14 July 2006)"

Check out the map on page 7 of this link.
It's the one with Iraq redrawn as "Arab Shia State" and "Sunni Iraq".


----------



## MJB12741 (May 9, 2013)

Eh, Princess, for your education, Pakistan is a Muslim country.  And Pakistan is a nuclear country as well.  Live & learn.  Enjoy!

Nuclear power in Pakistan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia





loinboy said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Surely you must know that Pakistan is a Muslim country.  And we certainly don't know what Iran is hiding by now.  Why not research what they have.  By the way, may I ask you a question.  When you are sitting on your regular barstool, do you blurt out "f@@k this and f@@k that because it seems you can rarely get through a post without that particular vulgarity.
> ...


----------



## Jos (May 9, 2013)

Hezbollah  *already* has a formidable arsenal of over 60,000 rockets


----------



## MJB12741 (May 9, 2013)

Exactly right.  Like I said, no missiles for Hezbollah this time.  Bravo Israel.  Don't you agree?





Jos said:


> Hezbollah  *already* has a formidable arsenal of over 60,000 rockets


----------



## RoccoR (May 9, 2013)

loinboy;

Sometimes you kill me!



loinboy said:


> Pakistan is Hindu.


*(COMMENT)*

But, it was not totally without merit, given the history.  After the separation of Pakistan from India under the Indian Independence Act of 1947, millions of people migrated, 7-to-8 million Muslims to Pakistan and 9-to-10 million Hindi from Pak to India.

In all fairness, in a time prior to 1947, you would --- you would have been right.  Clearly the Muslim and Hindu did not assimilate well.  But then, some religious factions have a history of not assimilating well with other cultures.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Hossfly (May 9, 2013)

loinboy said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Surely you must know that Pakistan is a Muslim country.  And we certainly don't know what Iran is hiding by now.  Why not research what they have.  By the way, may I ask you a question.  When you are sitting on your regular barstool, do you blurt out "f@@k this and f@@k that because it seems you can rarely get through a post without that particular vulgarity.
> ...


Post Of The Week!


----------



## MJB12741 (May 9, 2013)

"Pakistan is Hindu."  And "there are no nuclear Muslim countries".  How blessed we are to have princess loinboy here for laughs.





Hossfly said:


> loinboy said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...


----------



## toastman (May 9, 2013)

MJB12741 said:


> "Pakistan is Hindu."  And "there are no nuclear Muslim countries".  How blessed we are to have princess loinboy here for laughs.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Looks like loiney ran away with his tail between his legs !


----------



## Hossfly (May 9, 2013)

toastman said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > "Pakistan is Hindu."  And "there are no nuclear Muslim countries".  How blessed we are to have princess loinboy here for laughs.
> ...


Let's not gloat over Loinies faux pas. He may well be running away from a fatwah issued after he desecrated Islam by calling Pakistan a Hindu country.


----------



## MJB12741 (May 9, 2013)

So much to learn.  So little time for that boy.




Hossfly said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > MJB12741 said:
> ...


----------



## Jos (May 9, 2013)

*Russia To Sell Anti-Aircraft Missile Batteries To Syria*


> Israel has warned the United States that Russia plans to sell sophisticated missile systems to Syria that would complicate any foreign intervention there, the Wall Street Journal reported.
> 
> The Journal reported late Wednesday that Israel had provided information to Washington about the imminent sale to Syria of Russian S-300 missile batteries, advanced ground-to-air weapons that can take out aircraft or guided missiles.


Russia To Sell Anti-Aircraft Missile Batteries To Syria, Israel Warns U.S.
These defensive weapons will be a game-changer, vastly complicating any Israeli/US/Nato attempts to create a no-fly zone over Syria, or attack it overtly.


----------



## Hossfly (May 9, 2013)

Jos said:


> *Russia To Sell Anti-Aircraft Missile Batteries To Syria*
> 
> 
> > Israel has warned the United States that Russia plans to sell sophisticated missile systems to Syria that would complicate any foreign intervention there, the Wall Street Journal reported.
> ...


Israel is awaiting shipment of the F-35. Can you spell stealth? Or Iron Dome?


----------



## Jos (May 9, 2013)

stealth = Russia delivers supersonic cruise missiles to Syria


> Haaretz
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Report: Russia delivers supersonic cruise missiles to Syria - Israel News | Haaretz Daily Newspaper


----------



## Jos (May 9, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> Israel is awaiting shipment of the F-35. Can you spell stealth? Or Iron Dome?


*F-35 fighter jet fleet grounded by Pentagon* 
BBC News - F-35 fighter jet fleet grounded by Pentagon


----------



## Jos (May 9, 2013)

*



			Syria attacks suggest Israel can act with impunity
		
Click to expand...

*


> Twice in three days, Israeli warplanes entered Syrian airspace and fired on suspected weapons caches bound for Hezbollah -- and nothing has happened in response.
> 
> Some experts are predicting that will continue to be the case following airstrikes near Damascus on Friday and Sunday that are widely believed to be the work of the Israel Defense Forces. According to reports, the strikes targeted shipments of long-range, Iranian-made Fateh-110 missiles capable of striking deep into Israel.
> 
> Israel hasnt commented on the strikes, but the IDF has moved two Iron Dome missile defense batteries to its northern border and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delayed his departure to China for several hours to convene his security cabinet. Meanwhile, Syrias foreign minister told CNN on Sunday that the strikes amounted to a declaration of war.


Syria attacks suggest Israel can act with impunity | JTA - Jewish & Israel News

Pride goes before a fall!  see the hubris dripping from these people! Israel is playing chess with Putin and they are about to be checkmated!


----------



## toastman (May 9, 2013)

Jos said:


> *Russia To Sell Anti-Aircraft Missile Batteries To Syria*
> 
> 
> > Israel has warned the United States that Russia plans to sell sophisticated missile systems to Syria that would complicate any foreign intervention there, the Wall Street Journal reported.
> ...



Exxept, the missile was launched from Lebanon with a long range missile from a F-16 

Don't cry though !


----------



## georgephillip (May 9, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> Jos said:
> 
> 
> > *Russia To Sell Anti-Aircraft Missile Batteries To Syria*
> ...


Can you spell P-O-R-K?

"The Pentagon wants to spend about $8.4 billion in the next fiscal year to continue developing and purchasing Lockheed Martin Corp. (LMT)s F-35, the fighter that is seven years behind schedule and 70 percent over initial cost estimates."

War whores of the world...unite!

Lockheed?s Troubled F-35 Unscathed in Pentagon?s Budget - Bloomberg


----------



## RoccoR (May 9, 2013)

georgephillip, Hossfly, Jos, _et al,_

One has to remember that just about anything in the air can engage targets in and around Damascus.  




​
As you can see, Haifa is less than 100mi from Damascus.  And both the airbases at Ramat and Afula are even closer.  

Remember what I said.  We can see everything, hear everything and direct everything.  We own the sky.  Granted, the S-330/400 Russian Air Defense systems are formidable, but not invincible.  Even to non-stealth threats, they are vulnerable.  You don't target the launchers, but the Target Acquisition Radars (TARs)(1L119 Nebo SVU)_(these illuminate the targeted aircraft)_ and the Engagement Radars (ERs) (30N6E Flap Lid)_(these provide mid-course correction to the SAM for intercept)_.  You can have hundreds of missiles ready for launch, but without these two systems, they are blind.  The "Wild Weasels/SEAD" pick-off these Radar/Command & Control systems, and the fighter bombers do the rest.  The AGM-88 High Speed Antiradiation Missile [(HARM) (Mach 2: Range 30mi+)].

A "Wild Weasel" lifting off from Ramat and Afula can be at the border in 2 minutes at Mach 1, and in engagement ranges for ADA around Damascus in another two minutes.  They can fly faint missions just to trigger the ADA Response, mapping for SIGINT as they go, or fly an interdiction mission on suspect radars.



georgephillip said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Jos said:
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

You don't need the F-35 to combat the S-300 series SAM that is being taked about.  You need a capable "Wild Weasel/SEAD" program. 

There is a gamble in play.  The Russians believe that the S-300/400 ADA SAM system can defeat US interdiction systems.  It appears that they might try to test that theory; in a place that they can freely engage by proxy.

In over 4 decades, no country using Soviet/Russian ADA has successfully defended against US technology.  The Russians have a lot riding on this.  If they win, they win big.  If they lose, they lose big.  If we engage, it has to be a decisive victory in the air.  If we lose, it will be a major setback for the US and NATO forces that depend on the ability to defeat those systems.  If we engage and lose, everyone will be clamoring for Russian ADA to defend against US air superiority.  

*(END GAME)*

Some think that _(at some level)_ Syria is some kind of political game of "pork;" as evidence _supra_.  Some think that _(at some level)_ this is some sort of off-shoot of the anti-Israel game.  But the fact is, that at the strategic level, this is about the Russians and the US performing maintenance on their regional influence.  Fate chose Syria as the ground.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip (May 9, 2013)

One of the recurring talking points on the left is the following:

During Desert Storm in '91 when the rest of us got our first look at the sophisticated hi-tech weaponry that decimated much of Baghdad, the Russians understood they could never compete with that level of technology. Hence they issued a public pronouncement that if a single member of the Russian armed forces ever dies from a US smart bomb, they will conduct a nuclear retaliation on the closest NATO installation.

Do you know if the Russians ever made that promise?
If so, is it still in effect today.
And even if that specific threat is not in play, what the HELL does happen if Israel kills Russian troops in Syria?


----------



## irosie91 (May 9, 2013)

georgephillip said:


> One of the recurring talking points on the left is the following:
> 
> During Desert Storm in '91 when the rest of us got our first look at the sophisticated hi-tech weaponry that decimated much of Baghdad, the Russians understood they could never compete with that level of technology. Hence they issued a public pronouncement that if a single member of the Russian armed forces ever dies from a US smart bomb, they will conduct a nuclear retaliation on the closest NATO installation.
> 
> ...




Nothing-----russians died in the   1967  war in the SINAI-----russia never 
complained.    How stupid do you think they are----if they put their people 
in the field----they expect some to die


----------



## georgephillip (May 9, 2013)

Americans died in the Mediterranean in '67, too.
Wait 'till they get on CSPAN


----------



## RoccoR (May 9, 2013)

georgephillip;  _et al,_

I know of no such specific threat.  But, it doesn't mean it was made.  The Russians are known, from time to time, to let fly some bold speak.  It doesn't mean it is credible.



georgephillip said:


> One of the recurring talking points on the left is the following:
> 
> During Desert Storm in '91 when the rest of us got our first look at the sophisticated hi-tech weaponry that decimated much of Baghdad, the Russians understood they could never compete with that level of technology. Hence they issued a public pronouncement that if a single member of the Russian armed forces ever dies from a US smart bomb, they will conduct a nuclear retaliation on the closest NATO installation.
> 
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

I don't think such a threat is credible.

To be a military advisor or civilian assistance contractor in a foreign deployment always comes with risks.  I think everyone who has been involved with such foreign training, assistance, and advisory elements knows this.

It is unlikely that a mission is undertaken to specifically kill advisors.  It is more likely that a particular weapons system or logistical effort is targeted, and the advisor is killed through target proximity.  

It happens.  The controller, military attache, or senior advisor knows this and tries to reduce risk while still accomplishing the mission.  But you still must be prepared to accept the occasional empty chair.

It is a special job calling, for rare and special people, to perform in an unusual environment.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## toastman (May 9, 2013)

georgephillip said:


> One of the recurring talking points on the left is the following:
> 
> During Desert Storm in '91 when the rest of us got our first look at the sophisticated hi-tech weaponry that decimated much of Baghdad, the Russians understood they could never compete with that level of technology. Hence they issued a public pronouncement that if a single member of the Russian armed forces ever dies from a US smart bomb, they will conduct a nuclear retaliation on the closest NATO installation.
> 
> ...



Why would Russia commit suicide ?


----------



## Hossfly (May 9, 2013)

Jos said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Israel is awaiting shipment of the F-35. Can you spell stealth? Or Iron Dome?
> ...


Don't fret about this, Yousef Mohammed.  Everything will be worked out.  Maybe they will take you and Frau Sherri up for the ride of your lifetime.  It will be better than a "D" ride at Disneyland and something you both will never forget.

Video: The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter: the jet 'that almost flies itself' - Telegraph


----------



## Hossfly (May 9, 2013)

georgephillip said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Jos said:
> ...


Can you spell "exertion?"  Maybe if you had exerted yourself earlier the way you exert yourself on this forum and no doubt many others. bashing Israel and America, you could have made something of yourself instead of whining about how much something costs when you pay no taxes at all and probably have paid very little in your lifetime..  Meanwhile, in your own city, the aerospace and defense industry was so huge; and perhaps if you had exerted yourself you could have gotten a job at Hughes, TRW, Aerospace Corp., Litton,  etc. and now could have been sitting comfortable in your retirement.  Don't forget, Georgie Boy, it is the taxpayers in Los Angeles who actually exert themselves who are helping to pay for your subsidized apartment, and many of them still work in the defense and aerospace industry.


----------



## georgephillip (May 9, 2013)

toastman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > One of the recurring talking points on the left is the following:
> ...


It's still a M-A-D world.
Why would you commit suicide for Israel?

"According to the Federation of American Scientists, a renowned organization for assessing nuclear weapon stockpiles, Russia possesses the largest stockpile of weapons of mass destruction in the world."

Russia and weapons of mass destruction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## georgephillip (May 9, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...


I've never been sitting more comfortably in my entire life, Hossie.
Why do you always equate happiness with having a lot of money?
Too many Sunday's reaching deep to heap the old collection plate? 
There isn't enough money in this world to pay me to kill children.
Maybe you should exert a little thought in that direction before you run out of time?


----------



## Billo_Really (May 9, 2013)

RoccoR said:


> loinboy;
> 
> Sometimes you kill me!
> 
> ...


If Pakistan decides to nuke anyone, it's going to be India.


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (May 9, 2013)

Jos said:


> *
> 
> 
> 
> ...



We shall both enjoy watching the coming justice embrace Israel.


----------



## Hossfly (May 9, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> Jos said:
> 
> 
> > *
> ...


Since you appear to be a seer, Frau Sherri, could you possibly tell us the justice which await your friends who are busy killing people in the name of their religion.  Will they be taking the Express  Elevator down, down, down?


----------



## irosie91 (May 9, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> Jos said:
> 
> 
> > *
> ...




How much will you enjoy it,  Sherri----as much as you and yours 
enjoy  severing the genitalia of young boys and shoving the organs 
down their still living throats for the glory of your "god"  isa?   As much 
as you enjoy the fact that your kith and kin have murdered in the hundreds 
of millions??--------btw----have you ever attained any pleasure by any means 
other than the overtly perverse?      how frustrating has your life become 
now that the good old days when you and yours could easily engage in 
obscene mutilation in your   "houses of worship"     before technological 
advances made the recordings of your vile filth so easily obtained


----------



## Hossfly (May 9, 2013)

georgephillip said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...


What the hell are you talking about, leech?


----------



## MJB12741 (May 9, 2013)

OMG!  Hindu Pakistan is going to nuke Hindu India?  Please excuse me while I go tell my neighbors what I learned from Princess.




loinboy said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > loinboy;
> ...


----------



## Billo_Really (May 10, 2013)

MJB12741 said:


> OMG!  Hindu Pakistan is going to nuke Hindu India?  Please excuse me while I go tell my neighbors what I learned from Princess.


All I know is that one of them is Hindu, the other is Buddhist and they hate each others guts.  So if Pakistan is the only Islamic country with nuclear weapons, then there is still no threat to Israel because that would cut into Pakistan's "hate time" for India, which is something they're not willing to do.


----------



## georgephillip (May 10, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...


Just the possibility that all who volunteer to participate in the mass murder of children and other innocents may eventually find themselves in the same Express Elevator?


----------



## RoccoR (May 10, 2013)

georgephillip,  _et al,_

I assume you are speaking of the Palestinians _(Hezbollah, Hamas, the people who support them)_, the Assad Regime, and of course the Iranians.



georgephillip said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

The initiator of death are these instigators [Palestinians _(Hezbollah, Hamas, the people who support them)_, the Assad Regime, and of course the Iranians].  If they assume the role of peacemaker, the combat exchange that results in death would subside.  But it is the constant conflict instigated by this strange cohort that sets the condition for death.  It is the Arab that has the establish historical behavior for terrorism, suicide bombings, sneak attacks, territorial invasions, and the use of indiscriminate rocket fires that result in the deaths you so prominently parade as vile and despicable.

The constant use of the children and their deaths, which are a direct result of Palestinian lawlessness and reckless action, is merely a tool.  It is as if the parents throw their children into the street in front of a car, and try to hold the drivers responsible for their death.  I have less and less sympathy for that pathology.  Yes, any unnecessary death is one too many.  And the death of a child is even more tragic.  But the responsibility for the deaths you raise is at the feet of the Palestinian and not Israel.  Palestinian peace stops the deaths of children, not Palestinian rockets (the cause).

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## toastman (May 10, 2013)

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> I assume you are speaking of the Palestinians _(Hezbollah, Hamas, the people who support them)_, the Assad Regime, and of course the Iranians.
> 
> ...



Like this ?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLu0jEdSuGM]palestinian get hit by car.wmv - YouTube[/ame]

You will also find propaganda videos of the same incident but they beginning is cut off. They only show the Palestinian boy getting hit by the car and claim the Settler ran over him intentionally . Pallywood !!!


----------



## georgephillip (May 10, 2013)

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> I assume you are speaking of the Palestinians _(Hezbollah, Hamas, the people who support them)_, the Assad Regime, and of course the Iranians.
> 
> ...


Rocco...which country has been the greatest instigator of death on this planet during your entire lifetime?
Which country has maimed, murdered, and displaced millions of children from Korea to Kosovo?
Which country has propped up Israeli terror in Lebanon for two generations.
I understand why someone as ignorant and ill-educated as Hoss believes an accident of birth makes these questions academic
Why do you?


----------



## MJB12741 (May 10, 2013)

Isn't it interesting how Israel's greatest enemies are also America's greatest enemies.  And here we are concerned about rounding up & deporting Mexicans who love our country & want to become citizens rather than go after our own enemies from within.





georgephillip said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip,  _et al,_
> ...


----------



## georgephillip (May 10, 2013)

How are you defining "enemy?"

As anyone who opposes the mass murder/displacement/incarceration of millions of innocent Muslims?

Mexico still suffers its eternal dilemma: So far from god; so close to Wall Street


----------



## MJB12741 (May 10, 2013)

Good luck with your reading disorder.


"Rocco...which country has been the greatest instigator of death on this planet during your entire lifetime?
Which country has maimed, murdered, and displaced millions of children from Korea to Kosovo?
Which country has propped up Israeli terror in Lebanon for two generations.
I understand why someone as ignorant and ill-educated as Hoss believes an accident of birth makes these questions academic
Why do you"? 





georgephillip said:


> How are you defining "enemy?"
> 
> As anyone who opposes the mass murder/displacement/incarceration of millions of innocent Muslims?
> 
> Mexico still suffers its eternal dilemma: So far from god; so close to Wall Street


----------



## georgephillip (May 10, 2013)

MJB12741 said:


> Good luck with your reading disorder.
> 
> 
> "Rocco...which country has been the greatest instigator of death on this planet during your entire lifetime?
> ...


What of your moral disorder...do you profit from the mass murder of children?


----------



## MJB12741 (May 10, 2013)

No way do I "profit from mass murder of children" like the very first documented massacre in the Middle East.  Do you approve?

1929 Hebron massacre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




georgephillip said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > Good luck with your reading disorder.
> ...


----------



## RoccoR (May 10, 2013)

georgephillip,  _et al,_



georgephillip said:


> (W)hich country has been the greatest instigator of death on this planet during your entire lifetime?
> 
> Which country has maimed, murdered, and displaced millions of children from Korea to Kosovo?


*(ANSWERS)*

These are one and the same question.   I suppose that I would have to say either:


Khmer Rouge and the Pol Pot Regime in Cambodia, 1975-1979, 2,000,000 killed.

--- OR ---​

Hutu militia killing 6,000 to 10,000 a day, a total of about 800,000 deaths in Rwanda in 1994.



georgephillip said:


> Which country has propped up Israeli terror in Lebanon for two generations.


*(ANSWERS)*

This presupposes that Israel instigated some terror operation against Lebanon.  

The Israeli-Lebanese disputes are part of the longer and larger Arab-Israeli conflict.  It starts with the 1948 participation of Lebanon in the invasion of Israel when it opposed the Independence of Israel.

The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), cross-border raiding invited violent  retaliatory raids.  Israel understand that the local inhabitants of South Lebanon, which openly supported the PLO, suffered; but, it was an inevitable consequence - one that was expected. 

The introduction of the muslims in support of PLO operations against Israel was a major contributing factor to the civil war.  However in about 1975, tensions between the Lebanese Christians, the Lebanese Muslims, and the PLO ignited a into a bloody civil war. Then (only when it was relatively safe) Syria sent a 40,000 "peace-keepers" into Eastern Lebanon on the side of the Muslims and PLO and opposed the Lebanese Christian.

The 1978 PLO attacks from southern Lebanon into northern Israel provoked a series of responses that continue even to today.

So Syria was the major force behind the combative behaviors in the Muslim+PLO versus Lebanese Christian fighting.



georgephillip said:


> Which I understand why someone as ignorant and ill-educated as Hoss believes an accident of birth makes these questions academic
> Why do you?


*(ANSWERS)*

I believe these kinds of question are not about the answers.  No matter what the answer truly is, it will not satisfy the questioner unless the answer condemns Israel _(a prerequisite condition for the respect due the answer)_.  It is not really about truth - justice - accountability - human rights, but about an active adversarial defense to support a counter-position to justify continued hostilities on the part of the Palestinian.

I'm not entirely sure that your characterization of "Hossfly's" position does him justice, or gives fair hearing to his thesis.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## toastman (May 10, 2013)

George, concerning the alleged 'terror' you claim the Israelis brought to Lebanon, you forgot to mention why they invaded in the first place. The PLO was trying to set up rocket launching sites in southern Lebanon to terrorize Israelis in the north. In other words, Lebanon was knowingly and willingly harboring terrorists. The way I see it , when a country lets terrorists set up their sites (i.e Afghanistan, Iraq), civilians always pay a heavy price unfortunately. Nature of the beast. I hope you understand what I'm trying to say.


----------



## Roudy (May 10, 2013)

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> I assume you are speaking of the Palestinians _(Hezbollah, Hamas, the people who support them)_, the Assad Regime, and of course the Iranians.
> 
> ...


----------



## Hossfly (May 10, 2013)

loinboy said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > OMG!  Hindu Pakistan is going to nuke Hindu India?  Please excuse me while I go tell my neighbors what I learned from Princess.
> ...


But, Sir Loin, regardless of the hate Hindus and Muslims (I don't think there would be many Buddhists in Pakistan) might have for each other, it seems Muslims around the world (even if they have never seen a Jew in their lives) are taught to hate the Jews and Israel, and a suitcase bomb can do a lot of damage


----------



## MJB12741 (May 10, 2013)

You see George, it's like when president Kennedy told the Russians to remove those missiles off the coast of Cuba aimed at Florida or the United States will respond in a declaration of war.





toastman said:


> George, concerning the alleged 'terror' you claim the Israelis brought to Lebanon, you forgot to mention why they invaded in the first place. The PLO was trying to set up rocket launching sites in southern Lebanon to terrorize Israelis in the north. In other words, Lebanon was knowingly and willingly harboring terrorists. The way I see it , when a country lets terrorists set up their sites (i.e Afghanistan, Iraq), civilians always pay a heavy price unfortunately. Nature of the beast. I hope you understand what I'm trying to say.


----------



## georgephillip (May 11, 2013)

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


In fact neither Hutu nor Pol Pot has maimed or murdered millions of innocent Muslims over the course of your life, Rocco. Hutu may have had encouragement from western multinationals in their Rwandan pogroms and, of course, Pol Pot would have never acquired a base large enough to inflict his genocide upon Cambodia with the help of Dick, Henry, and Operation Menu:

"...The bombing began on the night of 18 March with a raid by 60 B-52 Stratofortress bombers, based at Andersen Air Force Base, Guam. The target was Base Area 353, the supposed location of COSVN in the Fishhook.[13] Although the aircrews were briefed that their mission was to take place in South Vietnam, 48 of the bombers were diverted across the Cambodian border and dropped 2,400 tons of bombs.[14] The mission was designated Breakfast, after the morning Pentagon planning session at which it was devised.[citation needed]

"Breakfast was so successful (in US terms) that General Abrams provided a list of 15 more known Base Areas for targeting.[15] The five remaining missions and targets were: Lunch (Base Area 609), Snack (Base Area 351), Dinner (Base Area 352), Supper (Base Area 740), and Dessert (Base Area 350)[citation needed]. *SAC flew 3,800 B-52 sorties against these targets, and dropped 108,823 tons of ordnance during the missions.*"

The Greatest Purveyor of Violence on This Planet carpet bombed Cambodia, destroying the social fabric of that country and enraging its population to such an extent that Pol Pot convinced them to murder most of their intellectuals and political elites. How much money has the esteemed intellectual Henry Kissinger earned from that war crime?

Probably less than he earns from playing the Great Game in Lebanon.

At the conclusion of the War to End all Wars, France and Britain drew the borders of today's Middle East. The crown jewel in their scheme had to wait until 1948 for its "independence." By that time the US had consolidated much of the British Empire within its own Grand Area. Hundreds of thousands of Arabs were evicted by Israel in 1948, and some landed in Lebanon where they actually had the arrogance to push back against the imperial ambitions of the Great Powers of the world, acting through their little loyal Jewish Ulster.

That original ethnic cleansing of Palestine by the Jews in 1948 is the terror operation that Israel inflicted upon Lebanon and Syria.

Today, the Great Game continues under the umbrella of NATO, a gaggle of war mongers whose total "defense" spending equals 70% of the world's total. Syria and Lebanon will soon follow in the footsteps of Iraq and Libya with Sudan, Somalia, and Iran waiting their turns.

The Great Powers have decided to militarize the eastern Mediterranean in order to protect oil pipelines running from the Caspian Sea to Turkey. It looks like a fairly simple quid pro quo: Israel and Turkey assume joint control of Syrian and Lebanese coastal waters. Jews get the Litani River for a northern border and official membership in NATO. Turkey gives up half its territory for a "Free Kurdistan" and gets welcomed into the EU.

I'm not entirely sure why you consistently deny your country's leading role in inflicting terror upon millions of Muslims in the Middle East, but I am clear your answer will have little to do with truth-justice-accountability or human rights; in fact, it seems your answer has more to do with an unswerving loyalty to the power that comes from the barrel of a gun. 

Live  by the gun...?


----------



## georgephillip (May 11, 2013)

MJB12741 said:


> No way do I "profit from mass murder of children" like the very first documented massacre in the Middle East.  Do you approve?
> 
> 1929 Hebron massacre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> ...


No more nor less than I approve of the current situation in Fallujah.
You?


----------



## georgephillip (May 11, 2013)

MJB12741 said:


> You see George, it's like when president Kennedy told the Russians to remove those missiles off the coast of Cuba aimed at Florida or the United States will respond in a declaration of war.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I see your problem with historical context:

"After provocative political moves and the failed US attempt to overthrow the Cuban regime (Bay of Pigs, Operation Mongoose), in May 1962 Nikita Khrushchev proposed the idea of placing Soviet nuclear missiles on Cuba to deter any future invasion attempt. 

"During a meeting between Khrushchev and Fidel Castro that July, a secret agreement was reached and construction of several missile sites began in the late summer. *Such a move would also neutralize the US's advantage of having missiles in Turkey."*

Cuban missile crisis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Toast...when 650,000 Jews inflicted their nation upon 1.2 million Arabs in Palestine in 1948, Israel set in motion a chain of events that leads directly to today's situation in Syria and Lebanon. Israel and the US and NATO are inflicting terror upon the Muslims of those two countries and they are doing it for the same reason imperial beasts have always behaved; it is $imply in their nature$.


----------



## RoccoR (May 11, 2013)

georgephillip,  _et al,_

I see you've altered the initial question to narrow it to "Muslims."



georgephillip said:


> In fact neither Hutu nor Pol Pot has maimed or murdered millions of innocent Muslims over the course of your life, Rocco. Hutu may have had encouragement from western multinationals in their Rwandan pogroms and, of course, Pol Pot would have never acquired a base large enough to inflict his genocide upon Cambodia with the help of Dick, Henry, and Operation Menu.


*(COMMENT)*

All anti-American rhetoric has the intent of making every American action appear aggressive.  The Muslim effort to make themselves appear as victims is no different.

As for the discussion on Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge/Khmer Rumdo/Vietnamese-aligned Communists, anyone that tries, even remotely, to blame the mass genocide (Cambodian on Cambodian) on the US is just being silly.  You can blame the bombing of the North-South route of the Ho Chi Minh Trail and NVA pre-positioned supply point in the eastern corridor of Cambodia on the US if you want, but a military target is a military target.  But that is a different war; for a different discussion.



georgephillip said:


> The Greatest Purveyor of Violence on This Planet carpet bombed Cambodia, destroying the social fabric of that country and enraging its population to such an extent that Pol Pot convinced them to murder most of their intellectuals and political elites. How much money has the esteemed intellectual Henry Kissinger earned from that war crime?


*(COMMENT)*

The US didn't destroy the social fabric of Cambodia; the Cambodians did that themselves.  And Henry Kissinger did not monetarily profit from his position, nor was he a war criminal.  This again is an effort to smear the name of a good man.  While I (personally) did not agree with all his positions on the war, the strategy, and the overall campaign, he did what he could in the service of the nation and his President.



georgephillip said:


> At the conclusion of the War to End all Wars, France and Britain drew the borders of today's Middle East. The crown jewel in their scheme had to wait until 1948 for its "independence." By that time the US had consolidated much of the British Empire within its own Grand Area. Hundreds of thousands of Arabs were evicted by Israel in 1948, and some landed in Lebanon where they actually had the arrogance to push back against the imperial ambitions of the Great Powers of the world, acting through their little loyal Jewish Ulster.
> 
> That original ethnic cleansing of Palestine by the Jews in 1948 is the terror operation that Israel inflicted upon Lebanon and Syria.


*(COMMENT)*

The fact of the matter is, that both Lebanon and Syria took active measures to instigate war, by means of an invasion.  Both Lebanon and Syria were both nations born of Mandate Power, yet they conspired to deny the right of Israel to establish its nation.  There was no inspired Israeli Terrorist Operations targeting Lebanon or Syria in the 1948/49 War.  But there was an invasion; an attempt by Arab states to take by force territorial control.  That was wrong, and everyone knows it was wrong.



georgephillip said:


> Today, the Great Game continues under the umbrella of NATO, a gaggle of war mongers whose total "defense" spending equals 70% of the world's total. Syria and Lebanon will soon follow in the footsteps of Iraq and Libya with Sudan, Somalia, and Iran waiting their turns.


*(COMMENT)*

Nonsense!  Currently, NATO is not involved in the Middle East in terms of military expeditions.  Yes, NATO has a big budget; it is a big alliance.  NATO was NOT in Iraq.  Libya was an Arab Spring matter; not an independent NATO intervention.  The Sudan, well, is a quasi-Failed State that may yet stabilize.  Somalia, well --- what can you say about that mess.  Somalia is a failed state.  Iran is not in the same category as Libya, the Sudan, or Somalia.

_*INFO:  LINK --- >*_ Somalia tops failed states index for fifth year ? This Just In - CNN.com Blogs 



georgephillip said:


> The Great Powers have decided to militarize the eastern Mediterranean in order to protect oil pipelines running from the Caspian Sea to Turkey. It looks like a fairly simple quid pro quo: Israel and Turkey assume joint control of Syrian and Lebanese coastal waters. Jews get the Litani River for a northern border and official membership in NATO. Turkey gives up half its territory for a "Free Kurdistan" and gets welcomed into the EU.


*(COMMENT)*

Nice theory --- very (very) low probability of happening.  Too many other moving parts.



georgephillip said:


> I'm not entirely sure why you consistently deny your country's leading role in inflicting terror upon millions of Muslims in the Middle East, but I am clear your answer will have little to do with truth-justice-accountability or human rights; in fact, it seems your answer has more to do with an unswerving loyalty to the power that comes from the barrel of a gun.


*(COMMENT)*

The US, and the American People, have gone out of its way _(to an extreme in some cases)_ to express _(in no uncertain terms)_ that it is not at odds with the Muslim Culture or the followers of Islam.   The reverse is not so true.  While there are a significant number of Muslims and Islamic followers in the US, they have been and continue to be a source of grave concern to other multicultural Americans.  While they have had the opportunity to enjoy and participate in the uninhibitedly lifestyle of America, they are very quick to praise the barbaric, cruel, and extremely brutal behaviors exhibited by the Muslim cultures and Islamic teachings elsewhere.  



georgephillip said:


> Live  by the gun...?


*(COMMENT)*

What is that saying:  _*"Don't throw rocks if you live in a glass house!"*_ 










Maybe those Palestinian that attempt to "Live by the Gun" should adopt your concept.  But I don't think a culture that praises martyrs, or participates in beheadings, conducts suicide bombings, airline and ship hijackings, the assassination of olympic teams, or assaults on airports is going to be sympathetic to your cause.



georgephillip said:


> No more nor less than I approve of the current situation in Fallujah.
> You?


*(COMMENT)*

It is a terrible thing that Fallujah is suffering from this epidemic of birth defects.  But we would have had to nuke Fallujah for it to have been the fault of the US.  There simply is no scientific evidence that the affliction they suffer was caused by anything the US did.

There may be cause to believe that toxic metals, such as mercury (Hg), lead (Pb) [lead] uranium (U), or white phosphorus (WP), might be suspicious.  But having said that, WP was present in tracer rounds and illumination devices, but not used in Fallujah as an incendiary weapon.  Lead is always present in war; but the ground would have to be literally covered in rounds to get the effect we see in Fallujah.  We don't use mercury in our munitions.  As far as depleted uranium goes, you would have to have the landscape littered with it in order to get the effect seen in Fallujah; raising the ambient radioactivity to something on the order of Hiroshima.  While it is easy to blame the US for everything, you might want to wait until someone discovers the actual source of the contaminent; if indeed it is a contaminent.  

Having said the bleeding heart part, there would not have been this problem if the US had exercise the proper strategy.  One consistant with the barbarity of the people of Fallujah.  

_*Ceterum censeo Fallujah esse delendam​*_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip (May 11, 2013)

What would that strategy be, Rocco; How many Fallujahans have poisoned/murdered/displaced any  bleeding hearts in your family?

"Between October 1994 and October 1995, the number of birth defects per 1,000 live births in Al Basrah Maternity Hospital was 1.37. In 2003, the number of birth defects in Al Basrah Maternity Hospital was 23 per 1,000 livebirths. Within less than a decade, the occurrence of congenital birth defects *increased by an astonishing 17-fold in the same hospital*.

"As David Kenner notes in Foreign Policy, the numbers of miscarriages and birth defects are much higher than before the start of the war and are also "wildly out of proportion" to numbers collected in the rest of the world.

"Mozhgan Savabieasfahani, one of the lead authors of the 2012 study and a toxicologist at the University of Michigan, told The Independent in 2012 that there is '*compelling evidence" to connect the growing number of defects at birth to the military assaults in Basra and Fallujah*.'

Greatest purveyor of terror on planet earth, Rocco.
And now the shit is starting to blow back.

Iraq War Anniversary: Birth Defects And Cancer Rates At Devastating High In Basra And Fallujah (VIDEO)


----------



## RoccoR (May 11, 2013)

georgephillip,  _et al,_

Granted, there is something strange going on.



georgephillip said:


> What would that strategy be, Rocco; How many Fallujahans have poisoned/murdered/displaced any  bleeding hearts in your family?
> 
> "Between October 1994 and October 1995, the number of birth defects per 1,000 live births in Al Basrah Maternity Hospital was 1.37. In 2003, the number of birth defects in Al Basrah Maternity Hospital was 23 per 1,000 livebirths. Within less than a decade, the occurrence of congenital birth defects *increased by an astonishing 17-fold in the same hospital*.
> 
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

One of the things you learn very quickly, is that a mathematical correlation may be necessary to establish --- but it is not - by itself - sufficient to establishing a causal relationship to the event.

In your reference article, it says:  "Scientists suspect the rise is tied to the use of depleted uranium and white phosphorus in military assaults."


*LINK:* 
Metal Contamination and the Epidemic of Congenital Birth Defects in Iraqi Cities

As I said before, WP isn't used in anti-personnel weapons; it is for illumination.  And depleted uranium (DU) wasn't used in Fallujah, it is used in tank battles.  HE is used in built-up areas.  

There is no question that there seems to be a heavy metal exposure.  The report cites considerable information on the nature of the exposure, but no information on the source of the exposure.

Until we understand how the parents were exposed to the various heavy metals, , passing on the Congenital Birth Defects, we don't have a means to make an accusation.

We simply don't have sufficient information to draw a conclusion.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## irosie91 (May 11, 2013)

Please note-----the term  "birth defects"   is very vague.  Unless the '
specific  "defects"   considered to be "defects" are noted----the 'stat 
is utterly meaningless.    In fact a very high number of births---
in the best of circumstances   actually do have  "defects"----that 
are simply very mild     ---- a very slightly mis-shapen ear---can be 
called a "birth defect"----and happens to be a very common occurence. 

during labor---the HEAD of the infant OFTEN because very misshapen 
due to effusions in the subcutaneous layer of the scalp----but that 
problem resolves spontaneously.      The fact that the reported  'stat' 
is meaningless cannot be over-stated       You got something that 
actually means something      I have a cafe au lait spot on my arm---
is that a birth defect?-----it is an issue of migration of cells from the neural 
crest------is that not IMPRESSIVE  ??    should I sue someone?


----------



## georgephillip (May 11, 2013)

Some of us do.

"Intermittent bombing of populated cities in Iraq has
occurred since 1991. Most signi&#64257;cant was the bombardment
of Fallujah, a city in central Iraq, and Al Basrah, a city in
southern Iraq. Fallujah was heavily bombed in 2004. Subsequently, unusual numbers of birth defects have been surfacing in that city. Al Basrah was also a target of heavy bombing
(December 1998, March and April 2003). 

"Similar to Fallujah,
after the 2003 invasion and occupation of Iraq, the medical
staff in Al Basrah Maternity Hospital has been witnessing a
pattern of increase in congenital birth defects. Based on these
observations, many suspect that pollution created by the
bombardment of Iraqi cities has caused the current birth
defect crisis in that country (Al-Hadithi et al. 2012)."

What other possible explanation except the illegal US invasion and occupation of Iraq could explain these numbers?

http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs00128-012-0817-2.pdf


----------



## MJB12741 (May 12, 2013)

Okay.  Lets blame Fallujah on Israel.  After all, Iraq was America's war for Israel.  Right George?






georgephillip said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > No way do I "profit from mass murder of children" like the very first documented massacre in the Middle East.  Do you approve?
> ...


----------



## georgephillip (May 12, 2013)

MJB12741 said:


> Okay.  Lets blame Fallujah on Israel.  After all, Iraq was America's war for Israel.  Right George?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


We could blame Fallujah, Damascus, Tel Aviv, and Beirut on London and Paris, could we not?

"The Occupied Enemy Territory Administration or (OETA; pronounced o-eet-a[1]) was a period of British and French control over certain Arab-majority areas of the former Ottoman Empire between 1917&#8211;20 during and following World War I. It ended following the assignment of the French Mandate of Syria and Lebanon and British Mandate for Palestine at the 19&#8211;26 April 1920 San Remo conference."

Possibly the initials D & C might warrant some blame, too?


----------



## toastman (May 12, 2013)

georgephillip said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > You see George, it's like when president Kennedy told the Russians to remove those missiles off the coast of Cuba aimed at Florida or the United States will respond in a declaration of war.
> ...



The bold is one of the biggest pro - Palestinian myths.


----------



## toastman (May 12, 2013)

George , do you agree with me when I say that when countries knowingly and willingly harbor terrorists and terrorist organizations, and provides them with a safe haven among the civilian population, that civilian casualties are inevitable ??


----------



## georgephillip (May 12, 2013)

toastman said:


> George , do you agree with me when I say that when countries knowingly and willingly harbor terrorists and terrorist organizations, and provides them with a safe haven among the civilian population, that civilian casualties are inevitable ??


Yes, and I would offer Boston as a recent example.


----------



## georgephillip (May 12, 2013)

toastman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > MJB12741 said:
> ...


What do you believe the ratio of Jew to Arab was in 1948 Palestine?


----------



## toastman (May 12, 2013)

georgephillip said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...



Better yet, how many Palestinians fled the 1948-1949 civil war ?


----------



## georgephillip (May 12, 2013)

toastman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...


"The 1948 Palestinian exodus, known in Arabic as the Nakba (Arabic: &#1575;&#1604;&#1606;&#1603;&#1576;&#1577;*, an-Nakbah, lit. "disaster", "catastrophe", or "cataclysm"),[1] occurred when approximately 711,000 to 725,000 Palestinian Arabs left, fled or were expelled from their homes, during the 1947&#8211;1948 Civil War in Mandatory Palestine and the 1948 Arab-Israeli War.[2] 

"The term nakba also refers to the period of war itself and events affecting Palestinians December 1947 to January 1949, and is synonymous in that sense with what is known to Israelis as the War of Independence (Hebrew: &#1502;&#1500;&#1495;&#1502;&#1514; &#1492;&#1506;&#1510;&#1502;&#1488;&#1493;&#1514; or &#1502;&#1500;&#1495;&#1502;&#1514; &#1492;&#1511;&#1493;&#1502;&#1502;&#1497;&#1493;&#1514;, Milkhemet Ha'atzma'ut, a term which covers those two events).[3][4][5][6]"

1948 Palestinian exodus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## toastman (May 12, 2013)

I've read that page several times. And nowhere does it say that Israel instigated a Jewish State on the Palestinians. Learn to read and interpret, ...
And are you EVER able to come up with your own opinions? It seems like in every one of your posts, you are quoting articles . It's almost like you're a sock puppet for terrorists worldwide


----------



## georgephillip (May 12, 2013)

toastman said:


> I've read that page several times. And nowhere does it say that Israel instigated a Jewish State on the Palestinians. Learn to read and interpret, ...
> And are you EVER able to come up with your own opinions? It seems like in every one of your posts, you are quoting articles . It's almost like you're a sock puppet for terrorists worldwide


You still haven't told me the ratio of Jew to Arab in 1948 Palestine.
Reading dysfunction?


----------



## MJB12741 (May 12, 2013)

What the Arab countries did to their Palestinians to make them flee & become refugees with no right of return is unforgivable.  And then to make matters even worse for the Palestinians, Israel makes peace offerings to them, builds a security fence & gives them their own land instead of helping the Palestinians return back to their indigenous homelands.  And then those Zionists wonder why they are thanked with jihad's, intifadas & rocket missiles.  Don't that beat all?





georgephillip said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...


----------



## Billo_Really (May 12, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> But, Sir Loin, regardless of the hate Hindus and Muslims (I don't think there would be many Buddhists in Pakistan) might have for each other, it seems Muslims around the world (even if they have never seen a Jew in their lives) are taught to hate the Jews and Israel, and a suitcase bomb can do a lot of damage


90% of the hatred towards Israel, has to do with the Israeli's treatment of the Palestinian's.


----------



## Lipush (May 12, 2013)

90% of the hatred has to do with hidden-Antisemitism.

And that's a _fact_.

Most of those haters cannot even point out Sderot on the map, but they all sing the "apartheid" song!

Hypocrites!


----------



## MJB12741 (May 12, 2013)

Aha.  So tell us Princess what is the 90% hatred toward Israel by its enemies from?





loinboy said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > But, Sir Loin, regardless of the hate Hindus and Muslims (I don't think there would be many Buddhists in Pakistan) might have for each other, it seems Muslims around the world (even if they have never seen a Jew in their lives) are taught to hate the Jews and Israel, and a suitcase bomb can do a lot of damage
> ...


----------



## MJB12741 (May 12, 2013)

I have to agree that Israel's peace offerings, security fence & land concessions to Palestinians deserves Palestinian hatred toward Israel. All the Palestinians want is to be free from Israel's bondage.  If there is ever to be a lasting peace, Israel must learn from king Hussein how to treat Palestinians to achieve a lasting peace.  LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!




MJB12741 said:


> Aha.  So tell us Princess what is the 90% hatred toward Israel by its enemies from?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## toastman (May 12, 2013)

loinboy said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > But, Sir Loin, regardless of the hate Hindus and Muslims (I don't think there would be many Buddhists in Pakistan) might have for each other, it seems Muslims around the world (even if they have never seen a Jew in their lives) are taught to hate the Jews and Israel, and a suitcase bomb can do a lot of damage
> ...



And Pakistan is Hindu, right ?


----------



## MJB12741 (May 12, 2013)

That was so funny.  Amazing what we can learn from Princess.




toastman said:


> loinboy said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...


----------



## MJB12741 (May 12, 2013)

And then there was his statement "there is no nuclear Muslim country."  





MJB12741 said:


> That was so funny.  Amazing what we can learn from Princess.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## toastman (May 12, 2013)

MJB12741 said:


> And then there was his statement "there is no nuclear Muslim country."
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Two outrageous statements in the same thread. LOL. 
Life in the I/P forum would be so boring if we didn't have these pro - Palestinians to entertain us !


----------



## MJB12741 (May 12, 2013)

I agree.  What a relief they give us from having to deal with the real world of radical Islamic terrorists they support who are killing us infidels all over the world today.





toastman said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > And then there was his statement "there is no nuclear Muslim country."
> ...


----------



## MJB12741 (May 12, 2013)

How come good Christians like Sherri don't accept the Bible as being relevant to history?


----------



## georgephillip (May 13, 2013)

Lipush said:


> 90% of the hatred has to do with hidden-Antisemitism.
> 
> And that's a _fact_.
> 
> ...


"Sderot was founded in 1951 as a transit camp for Kurdish and Persian Jewish immigrants who lived in tents and shacks during the Jewish exodus from Muslim countries before permanent housing was completed in 1954.[6] It was built on lands once belonging to the Palestinian Arab village of Najd[7] and is located a few miles south of the village's ruins."

Your racist, apartheid state is built on Arab ruins.
Soon you will find out exactly how that felt.

Sderot - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## MJB12741 (May 13, 2013)

In all of the Middle East, only in Israel are all houses of worship protected by the government.  If this were not true, maybe Sherri or George will be so kind to tell us why the Al Asqa Mosque still remains built on the holy Jewish site of Solomon's Temple.





georgephillip said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> > 90% of the hatred has to do with hidden-Antisemitism.
> ...


----------



## Hossfly (May 13, 2013)

Looks as though Russian missles won't be going to Hezbullah after all. "Times, they are a'changin". Seems there was a song about that. I think.

Russian warship docks in Israel for first time - Israel Today | Israel News


----------



## georgephillip (May 13, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> Looks as though Russian missles won't be going to Hezbullah after all. "Times, they are a'changin". Seems there was a song about that. I think.
> 
> Russian warship docks in Israel for first time - Israel Today | Israel News


"For the first time since the establishment of the State of Israel, a Russian warship docked at the port city of Haifa earlier this month. The 'Azov' of Russian's Black Sea Fleet came to Israel at the request of the Association of Russian War Veterans to help celebrate the anniversary of the victory over Nazi Germany...

"Russia has long maintained a large naval base in Tartus, the second largest port city in Syria. But with Syria's ongoing civil war likely to end in that country descending into factional warfare and chaos, Russia is concerned for its interests in the region.

"Recent reports are that Moscow is searching for a new Mediterranean seaport to maintain strategic balance in the region. Russian delegations have reportedly examined Egypt and Algeria."

Russian warship docks in Israel for first time - Israel Today | Israel News

We can only imagine how many of those Russian War Vets will be celebrating the incredible Avraham Stern:

"Incredibly, Avraham Stern, the leader of the notorious 'Stern Gang,' late in 1940, made a written proposal to Hitler, by which the Jewish militias in Palestine, would fight on 'Germany&#8217;s side,' in the war against England, in exchange for the Nazis help in resolving the 'Jewish Question' in Europe, and their assistance in creating an 'historic Jewish state.'&#8221;

Another historic finding for the Jewish Question.

Baltimore Independent Media Center: 51 Documents: Zionist Collaboration With The Nazis, Edited by Lenni Brenner, Fort Lee, NJ (Barricade Books, 2002), 342 pages.


----------



## Hossfly (May 13, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> Looks as though Russian missles won't be going to Hezbullah after all. "Times, they are a'changin". Seems there was a song about that. I think.
> 
> Russian warship docks in Israel for first time - Israel Today | Israel News


Someone other than George might want to comment on the significance of this visit. I don't think it was meant to revive Hitler.


----------



## RoccoR (May 13, 2013)

georgephillip,  _et al,_

This implication and interpretation is just wrong on so many different levels, it is hard to just know were to begin.



georgephillip said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Looks as though Russian missles won't be going to Hezbullah after all. "Times, they are a'changin". Seems there was a song about that. I think.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Whether you talk about the Catholic Church, the IRA, some American businesses and banks, or any other number of activities I could mention, there were dealings with the Germans during WWII.  There was even a very strong US Lobby to keep America out of the European war.  It should be remembered that it was Germany that declared war on the US, and not the other way around.  

In any war, there will be factions on both sides that are working to fulfill their agenda.  Yes, even in the greater Jewish Community.  Somewhere in the neighborhood of 6 million Jews were extinguished by the Nazi in the years immediately preceding WWII and during the conflict.  While you can point to a few questionable activities by some prominent Jewish leaders, in the end, the rank-and-file Jew that help build the National Home and the State of Israel was not a proponent of the Nazi party.  No, the story today is not about pointing fingers at the few.  It is about toasting to the victory and survival of those that helped end a tyrannical regime; and in the process, maybe begin mending old bridges and building new ones.

But clearly --- finger pointing has nothing to do with the intent of the Russian visit to Haifa.  

While the EU, the US and Russia have not always seen eye-to-eye on the issues that make the Middle East so complex, there is little doubt that "today," there is one thing that can be agreed upon:  that radical Islamic fundamentalism poses a serious threat to the future of Regional peace. And there is one island in the Middle East that has not been corrupted by the influence of radical Islamic fundamentalism _(Shia or Sunni)_.  Israel!  It may be under fire by all its surrounding Arab neighbors that have been influenced in one way or another.  Clearly the Palestinians _(Hezbollah to the North and Hamas to the South)_ have the cloak of danger and the stink of death that follows radical Islamic fundamentalism.  But Israel has been resistant.  Israel is a place that the US and Russia can see common ground.  It may become more important than most of the Arab League can imagine.

This may be a pivotal moment in the development of the Middle East.  But clearly, a pro-Palestinian/anti-Israeli moment it is not.  People who are trying to develop a anti-Israel propaganda movement are not only on the wrong track, they forgot where they are going.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## MJB12741 (May 13, 2013)

They sure do search & search to find a bad Jew they can look to as typical.  Just goes to prove one need not necessarily have to be a Palestinian to have a Palestinian mentality.





RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> This implication and interpretation is just wrong on so many different levels, it is hard to just know were to begin.
> 
> ...


----------



## georgephillip (May 13, 2013)

How soon might we see Russia and Israel join NATO?

On September 6, 2007 Israel struck a Syrian nuclear facility killing a number of North Korean nuclear technicians. Some time prior, a freight train exploded in North Korea killing a number of Syrian nuclear techies.

What happens if an Israeli airstrike today kills an equal number of Russians in Syria?
Wouldn't the Bear have to hit back, and if so, with what degree of proportionality?

Operation Orchard - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Hossfly (May 13, 2013)

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> This implication and interpretation is just wrong on so many different levels, it is hard to just know were to begin.
> 
> ...


I hope you don't mind me latching onto your post, Rocco, but this is an interested tidbit regarding Russia which appeared in the ICEJ newsletter today.

Israel blesses the world
A delegation from Russias Federal Medical Biological Agency (FMBA) recently visited Jerusalems Hala-Rachel Nash Jerusalem Breast Clinic in an effort to learn how Israeli doctors treat breast cancer, a disease which an estimated 52,000 women a year are diagnosed with in Russia. The Russian physicians were very impressed by what they saw and professed an eagerness to copy the Israeli technology, methods and procedures at clinics in Russia. Meanwhile, Keren Kayemeth LeIsrael-Jewish National Fund (KKL-JNF) is joining with the South African Council for (Catholic) Bishops and the NGO Food and Trees for Africa in an effort to teach Israeli agricultural methods to small farmers in South Africa.


----------



## georgephillip (May 13, 2013)

Hossie...when are you expecting Israel and Russia to join the EU?
Before or after "Free" Kurdistan splinters Iraq, Iran, and Turkey?


----------



## RoccoR (May 13, 2013)

georgephillip,  _et al,_

This is not an unreasonable question.



georgephillip said:


> How soon might we see Russia and Israel join NATO?


*(COMMENT)*

Probably not in our lifetimes.

This doesn't mean that, at some point, we won't see temporal US-Russian military alliances.  We have already seen this on a political level (The Quartet as an example), and we've seen this on the mission specific intelligence & security level (CIA/MI--SVR/FSB).



georgephillip said:


> On September 6, 2007 Israel struck a Syrian nuclear facility killing a number of North Korean nuclear technicians. Some time prior, a freight train exploded in North Korea killing a number of Syrian nuclear techies.
> 
> What happens if an Israeli airstrike today kills an equal number of Russians in Syria?
> Wouldn't the Bear have to hit back, and if so, with what degree of proportionality?


*(COMMENT)*

Both the US and Russians are much more sophisticated than that.  This is rather Third-World thinking.  The Russians understand risk and the nature and association risk has to military advisory missions in a hostile fire zone.   If the Russians are worried, they will open a channel with the Israelis and come to an arrangement and understanding _(if they haven't already)_.

The idea of proportionality in strike-counterstrike situations is something for the political/diplomatic community to use in explaining the rationale for limited retaliation to achieve political goals that are not immediately obvious.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## MJB12741 (May 13, 2013)

Yes but according to George, Israel is on a collision course with Russia.  Sure would give us some relief from his radical Islamists yelling death to America & killing us infidels all over the world today.




RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> This is not an unreasonable question.
> 
> ...


----------



## Billo_Really (May 14, 2013)

Lipush said:


> 90% of the hatred has to do with hidden-Antisemitism.
> 
> And that's a _fact_.


It's not a fact; it's the little lie you tell yourself because you don't have the moral integrity to deal with the truth.  The fact that you stated the BDS movement is "violent", say's a lot about you!  It's say's you're mentally incapable of seeing things as they really are.  Because that claim, is just plain _"out there!"_




Lipush said:


> Most of those haters cannot even point out Sderot on the map, but they all sing the "apartheid" song!
> 
> Hypocrites!


Who gives a shit where it is on a map? That doesn't change the fact that you have "jew only" roads; "jew only" communities; Nakba laws; and the majority of Israeli's view the Palestinian's as sub-human.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 14, 2013)

MJB12741 said:


> Aha.  So tell us Princess what is the 90% hatred toward Israel by its enemies from?


IDF air-strikes and sorties.

Next question.


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (May 14, 2013)

loinboy said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> > 90% of the hatred has to do with hidden-Antisemitism.
> ...



SDEROT is a modern day Zionist creation and lies on the lands of an ethnically cleansed Palestinian village and her residents were forced to flee to Gaza as refugees. Why should anyone recognize a village like that, created through crimes against humanity? The correct name for it is Najd and I plan to reter to it by its lawful name of Najd from now on.


----------



## alayoua (May 14, 2013)

Thank you for this blog post. I think it's important for people to remember this when they are commenting.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 14, 2013)

alayoua said:


> Thank you for this blog post. I think it's important for people to remember this when they are commenting.


Did you just get banned after 2 posts?


----------



## MJB12741 (May 14, 2013)

Thank you for enlightening me.  Wouldn't it be wonderful if Israel would end their Zionist treatment of the Palestinians with their damn peace offerings, security fence & land concessions & just treat them with the same Arab country love, justice & respect the Palestinians are so well accustomed to.  And so well deserve?






loinboy said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > Aha.  So tell us Princess what is the 90% hatred toward Israel by its enemies from?
> ...


----------



## georgephillip (May 14, 2013)

MJB12741 said:


> Thank you for enlightening me.  Wouldn't it be wonderful if Israel would end their Zionist treatment of the Palestinians with their damn peace offerings, security fence & land concessions & just treat them with the same Arab country love, justice & respect the Palestinians are so well accustomed to.  And so well deserve?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


*What is "Creeping Annexation?"*

"How the number of settlers in the occupied territories jumped for about 4,000 in 1977 to some 200,000 today
     by Khalil Tufakji

"Since its 1967 occupation of the Palestinian territories, Israel&#8217;s policy has been underpinned by the strategy of creating facts through the construction and thickening of settlements on chosen sites, in order to build an independent Israeli entity within these territories. 

"In light of the current political and military balance of power, the situation thus created makes it almost impossible to force Israel into a total withdrawal from the occupied territories, and into the implementation of all the international resolutions pertaining to settlements and their illegality. 

"Should settlement activity proceed at its current pace, with Israel exploiting the staggering peace process, the geographic and demographic facts that will have been created as a result will form a major barrier to any peace process, blocking the way to a solution satisfactory to all parties."
*
Jews have just got to stop being so damn helpful*.

Palestine-Israel Journal: <b>Settlements: A Geographic and Demographic Barrier to Peace</b>


----------



## MJB12741 (May 14, 2013)

Isn't it just awful George?  Do you think maybe the Arabs made a big mistake uniting to annihilate Israel & leave their Palestinian pawns as refugees in the process?





georgephillip said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > Thank you for enlightening me.  Wouldn't it be wonderful if Israel would end their Zionist treatment of the Palestinians with their damn peace offerings, security fence & land concessions & just treat them with the same Arab country love, justice & respect the Palestinians are so well accustomed to.  And so well deserve?
> ...


----------



## georgephillip (May 14, 2013)

Isn't that what Moshe said?

"Moshe Dayan, the former Israeli defense minister (1967-1973) who laid down the cornerstone of the settlement policy, spoke of the need of building Jewish settlements in the occupied territories because they safeguard Israel&#8217;s security more effectively than does the army. 

"He noted that without the settlements, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) would be unable to stay in the territories, as it would remain an alien force ruling over a foreign people.

"Thus, the Labor Party inaugurated Israel&#8217;s settlement program in the wake of the 1967 war. 

"Of primary importance then was, and remains, the question of where the settlements should be built, and not whether they indeed should or not be built. This is the logic that led the drive for settlement building. Hence, the Allon Plan was devised, which in its barest outline was based on the following points..."

Palestine-Israel Journal: <b>Settlements: A Geographic and Demographic Barrier to Peace</b>


----------



## Hossfly (May 14, 2013)

georgephillip said:


> Isn't that what Moshe said?
> 
> "Moshe Dayan, the former Israeli defense minister (1967-1973) who laid down the cornerstone of the settlement policy, spoke of the need of building Jewish settlements in the occupied territories because they safeguard Israel&#8217;s security more effectively than does the army.
> 
> ...


So many of those quotes allegedly said by Israelis are fake, but you are trying so hard, Georgie Boy, that I have to give you E for effort.  It's a shame that you didn't put in this type of effort earlier in your life.  So tell us, Georgie Boy, we know that you would like Hezbollah to get missiles to use against Israel, but who do you really hope wins the Syrian Civil War?


----------



## MJB12741 (May 14, 2013)

The Syrians have now massacred close to 100,000 of their own people in their own country.  What a party!





Hossfly said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > Isn't that what Moshe said?
> ...


----------



## georgephillip (May 15, 2013)

MJB12741 said:


> The Syrians have now massacred close to 100,000 of their own people in their own country.  What a party!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Assad deserves his time at the Hague, but I'm not too clear which of his opponents you are backing.
When I see names like "Free Syrian Army" or "Syrian Islamic Liberation Front" or "Al-Nusra Front" in its Wiki entry, I see dependence on western intelligence services containing some individuals who probably deserve their own visit to the Netherlands. I suspect two things regarding the outcome: it will be determined by the economic self-interest of rival tribes from the world's richest 1%, and you will be utterly blind to your government's role in facilitating the crimes, just like you are regarding Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, and as you likely will be when the chickens roost a little closer to home in Mexico. Don't you ever tire of being  wrong?


----------



## Hossfly (May 15, 2013)

georgephillip said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > The Syrians have now massacred close to 100,000 of their own people in their own country.  What a party!
> ...


First off, Georgie Boy, I suggest you see your doctor to find out why you can't sleep but feel obsessed to post on a forum and still blame America even in the middle of the night when others in your town are sleeping.  When you say "your government," are you telling us you plan on leaving for a country that has a government which fits your needs?  And, Georgie Boy, you have to stop thinking about people who have money.  Just be grateful for what you have because in many countries in the world, people have much, much less than you have and go to bed hungry every night.  It would have been nice if  you could have had talent like Will Smith or one of the Rap singers so that you could have been rich now too, but since you don't have that talent, just accept yourself for what you are -- a bitter man.


----------



## kvetch (May 15, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > MJB12741 said:
> ...



Georgie and Sherri are winning this argument hands down

Cant you yawningly wrong  and boring thievin zios do any better??

Not even worth readin their ghastly zio crack is it??


----------



## MJB12741 (May 15, 2013)

Yessir sir.  Georgie & Sherrie are putting those Zionists to shame.  Gosh I wonder why those Zionists don't just lick their wounds & admit it instead of doing all they can to keep Georgie & Sherrie coming back for more?




kvetch said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...


----------



## RoccoR (May 15, 2013)

kvetch,  _et al_,

I'm confused.



kvetch said:


> Georgie and Sherri are winning this argument hands down
> 
> Cant you yawningly wrong  and boring thievin zios do any better??
> 
> Not even worth readin their ghastly zio crack is it??


*(COMMENT)*

I'm not sure what "George" and "Sherri" are winning!

There are only four positions you can take on this matter, relative to Syria.


You are pro-Assad Regime.
You are pro-Free Syrian forces.
You are uncommitted.
Hedge the bet and quasi-support both sides.


The Lebanese, the Palestinians, and Iranians are pro-Assad Regime.
The Israelis, the US, and the EU, are pro-Free Syrian forces.
The remainder of the Arab League is uncommitted.
the Russians are playing both sides.


So, in the discussion, anyone that is pro-Assad Regime is opposing the right of self-determination.
So, anyone in the discussion that is pro-Free Syrian force, support the peoples right to self-determination, support the spirit of the Arab Spring (similar to Libya and Egypt).
The uncommitted are mute.
Fense player only provide confusion.
What is there to "win" or "lose."  George and Sherri have chosen to side with the Assad Regime, against the people.  Naturally, anything the pro-Free Syrian Forces do is wrong from their perspective.  But that is completely understandable.  You either support the Ba'ath Party and Assad, the dictatorial regime, or you don't.

There is no real argument here to either win or lose.  We choose a side, or sand on the sideline and watch; occasionally cheer.

Is there a point to the discussion I've missed?

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip (May 15, 2013)

I think there is a class point your side often misses in these situations, Rocco.
Are you trying to say all Americans, Russians, Israelis, Syrians and Lebanese and Persians stand to gain or lose to the same extent as the richest 1% of the aforementioned people?

For example, how would you critique this "trap between delusions of total victory and its true consequences?"

"by: Deepak Tripathi is a British historian of the Cold War, the Middle East and the United States in the post-Soviet world. His latest books Imperial Designs: War, Humiliation and the Making of History (Potomac Books, imprint of the University of Nebraska Press) and A Journey Through Turbulence (Dignity University Press)..."

"The outcome of the recent Moscow visit of President Obama&#8217;s new secretary of state John Kerry is instructive. 

"America&#8217;s agreement with Russia that they co-sponsor an international conference to find a negotiated settlement raised some eyebrows in Washington and among U.S. allies in Europe and the Arab world. 

"President Vladimir Putin seemed to have prevailed in his insistence that Assad&#8217;s exit cannot be a precondition. But this precondition is the starting point for the Syrian rebels and many of their foreign supporters who have a wider Middle East agenda. 

"A commentary in Italy&#8217;s rightwing publication Il Geornale said in its headline, 'Obama&#8217;s Defeat: To Pacify Syria He Is In Cahoots With Putin...'"

"s for Russia, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov maintains that Moscow is &#8220;not planning to supply Syria with any weapons beyond the current contracts,&#8221; which, he says, are &#8220;for defensive purposes.&#8221; Russia&#8217;s message to Washington, delivered a year ago, continues to be &#8220;hands off Syria and Iran.&#8221; Obama continues his rhetorical maneuvers. And the war goes on."

George and Sherri and others have decided to side with the poor.
Which side is the CIA on?

America?s Syrian Riddle » Counterpunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names


----------



## Hossfly (May 15, 2013)

georgephillip said:


> I think there is a class point your side often misses in these situations, Rocco.
> Are you trying to say all Americans, Russians, Israelis, Syrians and Lebanese and Persians stand to gain or lose to the same extent as the richest 1% of the aforementioned people?
> 
> For example, how would you critique this "trap between delusions of total victory and its true consequences?"
> ...


If Georgie Boy and Frau Sherri really sided with the poor, instead of spending day and night on forums bashing America and Israel, they would be out doing their bit for the poor in their own towns.  How many times have you collected food for the needy, Georgie Boy; how many times have you volunteered in food pantries or food kitchens; how many times have you assisted some immigrant in your own Pico-Union neighborhood in learning to read English?  There are many things that people who are true humanitarians can do to help the needy, and sitting in front of a computer day and night is not the way they do it.  And they certain do not constantly whine about people who have money because they might have very little.  Why not get away from your computer for a while and take a bus downtown to the L.A.  Mission where they will be appreciative of your help.


----------



## RoccoR (May 15, 2013)

georgephillip,  _et al,_

You are trying to suggest that the political outcome of the civil war will be driven by the a class distinction [rich 'vs' poor].  The distribution of wealth in Syria is not the same as in the US.



georgephillip said:


> I think there is a class point your side often misses in these situations, Rocco.
> Are you trying to say all Americans, Russians, Israelis, Syrians and Lebanese and Persians stand to gain or lose to the same extent as the richest 1% of the aforementioned people?


*(COMMENT)*

While there will be an economic impact on the Syrian economy, the damage will happen no matter which side, internally, wins or loses.  In the Syrian economy, the main countries that Syria conducts export trade with are Iraq, Lebanon, Germany, Saudi Arabia, and Italy in that order of magnitude.

On the import side, China, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, UAE, Italy, South Korea, Germany, Russia (4.2%), Lebanon (4.1%), Egypt.  

None of the countries you mentioned are going to make any money on Syria --- no matter who wins.  Syria's economy is rather peaked.  



georgephillip said:


> For example, how would you critique this "trap between delusions of total victory and its true consequences?"


*(COMMENT)*

There are no real victors in a Civil War.  Some just lose less than others.  But the economic poor are on the front of the rebel forces.

If you support the Assad Regime, you are not fighting on the side of the poor citizenry.



			
				SYRIAN REBELS IN ALEPPO MOSTLY POOR said:
			
		

> ALEPPO, Syria (AP)  Most of the rebels fighting government forces in the city of Aleppo fit a specific mold: They're poor, religiously conservative and usually come from the underdeveloped countryside nearby.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Syrian rebels in Aleppo mostly poor, pious, rural
> OR
> Revolt of the underclass: Syria rebels carry fury born of marginalization - World News





georgephillip said:


> George and Sherri and others have decided to side with the poor.
> Which side is the CIA on?


*(COMMENT)*

No, I don't think this is correct.  I think they chose the side which the Palestinians support.

What aid the US has arranged has gone to Rebel Free-Syria forces (the poor).

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## MJB12741 (May 15, 2013)

I really don't think Israel much cares who winds up ruling Syria.


----------



## RoccoR (May 15, 2013)

MJB12741,  _et al,_

I'm not sure!



MJB12741 said:


> I really don't think Israel much cares who winds up ruling Syria.


*(COMMENT)*

I tend to think that in a time before the 1983 bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, by Lebanese terrorists, directed and controlled by Iran, Israel has seen a need to suppress the activities of Hezbollah and (if possible) to cut their umbilical with the IRCG-QF --- retarding their ability to receive illicit weapons and munitions.  

It might be possible for Israel to accomplish two goals here.  

There might be an opportunity here for the IDF to demonstrate that Israel does not want to fight against the people of Syrian, and to assit them in their struggle against the dictatorship of the Assad Regime.  

The Assad Regime is a benefactor to Hezbollah.  IRCG-QF is a benefactor to both Hezbollah and the Assad Regime.

By striking either Hezbollah, the IRCG-QF, or the Assad Regime, Israel also assists the Free Syrian Army; the very people that Israel would rather have good relations with, then bad.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## MJB12741 (May 15, 2013)

I certtainly agree with most of what you say here.  The big gamble is that if Israel backs the rebels, Israel may end up with al Qaeda to deal with for any prospects of peace rather than the Free Syrian Army faction of the rebels.




RoccoR said:


> MJB12741,  _et al,_
> 
> I'm not sure!
> 
> ...


----------



## georgephillip (May 16, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > I think there is a class point your side often misses in these situations, Rocco.
> ...


How many hours a week do you volunteer anywhere, Killer?
What relevance do your hours or mine have to do this particular topic?
I've never volunteered to inflict misery upon innocent human beings, unlike yourself.
Your victims are highly appreciative.

Agent Orange: Birth defects plague Vietnam; U.S. slow to help - chicagotribune.com


----------



## georgephillip (May 16, 2013)

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> You are trying to suggest that the political outcome of the civil war will be driven by the a class distinction [rich 'vs' poor].  The distribution of wealth in Syria is not the same as in the US.
> 
> ...


Why are rich Saudi parasites funding the Free Syrian Poor?


----------



## RoccoR (May 16, 2013)

georgephillip,  _et al,_

Two reasons.



georgephillip said:


> Why are rich Saudi parasites funding the Free Syrian Poor?


*(COMMENT)*

First, because we asked them.  And it appeals to them to be supportive of the common people that face a draconian dictator.  The Royal Family of Saudi Arabia is not a parasitic in any fashion. 

Second, because Saudi Arabia is a Kingdom and not a Dictatorship.  HRH King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia is a King interested in the people; in many respects, he wants and needs the support of the common people.  HRH has implemented a number of reforms _(both social and economic)_ and has shown his support by contributing to a number of public projects and program that benefit the general population or appeal to the citizenry.  HRH is a benevolent King, a chevalier in his own right; and part of the legacy HRH will leave behind for his family to further build upon.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## MJB12741 (May 16, 2013)

Get serious George?  Saudi Arabia is far more concerned about a nuclear Iran & Islamic terrorist organizations in Syria than Israel is.  In fact, Saudia Arabia previously granted the use of their air space for Israel to launch an attack on Iran.  Nice to know somebody besides Israel wants peace in the Middle East.  Don't you agree?





georgephillip said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip,  _et al,_
> ...


----------



## georgephillip (May 16, 2013)

MJB...why would rich Saudis worry about a "nuclear-armed" Iran when they shelter under the nuclear umbrella of the greatest purveyor of violence on the planet? If Israel truly seeks to apologize for its many acts of terror since 1948, wouldn't you think an apology to all surviving members of the USS Liberty would be a good place to start?


----------



## RoccoR (May 16, 2013)

georgephillip,

They did.



georgephillip said:


> MJB...why would rich Saudis worry about a "nuclear-armed" Iran when they shelter under the nuclear umbrella of the greatest purveyor of violence on the planet? If Israel truly seeks to apologize for its many acts of terror since 1948, wouldn't you think an apology to all surviving members of the USS Liberty would be a good place to start?


*(COMMENT)*

*LINK --->* The USS Liberty: Case Closed

"Israel apologized for the tragedy immediately and offered on June 9 to compensate the victims. Israel ultimately paid nearly $13 million in humanitarian reparations to the United States and to the families of the victims in amounts established by the U.S. State Department. The matter was officially closed between the two governments by an exchange of diplomatic notes on December 17, 1987. "

*LINK --->* USS Liberty incident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"In May 1968, the Israeli government paid US$3,323,500 as full payment to the families of the 34 men killed in the attack. In March 1969, Israel paid a further $3,566,457 in compensation to the men who had been wounded. On 18 December 1980, it agreed to pay $6 million as settlement for the U.S. claim of $7,644,146 for material damage to the Liberty itself.[8]"

v/r
R


----------



## georgephillip (May 16, 2013)

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> Two reasons.
> 
> ...


Obviously, HRH has the same commitment to human rights today as Israel did on 8 June 1967:

"Dissidents have been detained as political prisoners in Saudi Arabia during the 1990s, 2000s and 2010s.[1] Protests and sit-ins calling for political prisoners to be released took place during the 2011&#8211;2012 Saudi Arabian protests in many cities throughout Saudi Arabia,[2][3][4][5][6] with security forces firing live bullets in the air on 19 August 2012 at a protest at al-Ha'ir Prison.[7] 

"As of 2012, recent estimates of the number of political prisoners in Mabahith prisons range from a denial of any political prisoners at all by the Ministry of Interior,[3][8] to 30,000 by the UK-based Islamic Human Rights Commission[1] and the BBC[9]."

There is only one way an hereditary economic elite can rule its citizenry and it has little to do with supporting human rights.

Political prisoners in Saudi Arabia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## RoccoR (May 16, 2013)

georgephillip,  _et al,_

HRH is an Arab and is a Muslim.  Obviously, this will influence the way the King governs.



georgephillip said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Two reasons.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Is this unusual in the region for any government?  No!

Different nations require individualized approaches.  HRH uses the tools, the experience, and the approach that best suits his subjects and the customary law.  Changes are not made over night.



georgephillip said:


> There is only one way an hereditary economic elite can rule its citizenry and it has little to do with supporting human rights.


*(COMMENT)*

Well, I am not a King; nor the son of a King having the benefit of first hand training in Kingship.  My instinct tells me that there is more to it than that.  I would image that HRH has a great insight into what his people need, and what they expect.  HRH will know what needs the stern hand, and what requires a soft hand.  He will know the Muslim Law, traditional and customary, and what flexibility he has.

My instinct tells me there is no real "only one way an hereditary economic elite can rule."  That there are many aspects to consider; with very few situations where one-shoe fits all.  I suspect that it takes more than a simple man to exercise the many responsibilities required of a Kingdom such as Saudi Arabia.  It is a very intricate nation, with many facets; family-wise, religious, economic, military, political and industrially.  As an outside observer, I think HRH has quite a task in blending these considerations all together and forging a 21st Century Saudi Arabia.  But I believe, personal opinion, that HRH King Abdullah has balance these many facets together - rather spectacularly given the challenges presented.  

We may not agree with the positions HRH takes _(politically or otherwise)_, or even like the nature and culture of the Kingdom.  But it's not our Kingdom; but rather, it is his.  And it would appear that he has maneuvered through the many obstacles, that the nation has face, very well.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## irosie91 (May 16, 2013)

mr R---I have no doubt that the SAUDI KING is benevolent---and no doubt 
that he is  STUCK in a really superannuated system.    I have no doubt that 
you are trying to express that fact -----BUT   I also have no doubt that 
some of the super-elite and advantaged in that system will----no matter 
what happens want to CLING to the  SUPER ADVANTAGES.   There is no reason  to be optimistic and believe that the inheritors were be all that 
benevolent.   As far as I understand the saudi system  ----the  EXTENSIVE 
 "royal"  family owns just about everything-----thousands of princes and 
princesses  can create thousands of problems


----------



## Hossfly (May 16, 2013)

georgephillip said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...


It is quite obvious that Georgie Boy thinks it more important to man his computer posting away to bash Israel, the U.S., the U.S. military, and those he calls the "rich" day and night instead of helping the common man in his own area for a short time each day   Why not tell everyone again how you even faked a bad back to get out of basic training after only ten days because you, a grown man, got homesick.  I guess Georgie Boy, the wuss, has no problems with his back bent over his computer.  But keep on bringing up Vietnam, Georgie Boy.  It shows the viewers how desperate you are that you keep on bringing up something that happened years ago when so much is going on today


----------



## MJB12741 (May 17, 2013)

George, we already know you are anti-American.  But what does Viet Nam have to do with the subject of missiles to Hezbollah?


QUUOTE=georgephillip;7243950]





Hossfly said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > I think there is a class point your side often misses in these situations, Rocco.
> ...


How many hours a week do you volunteer anywhere, Killer?
What relevance do your hours or mine have to do this particular topic?
I've never volunteered to inflict misery upon innocent human beings, unlike yourself.
Your victims are highly appreciative.

Agent Orange: Birth defects plague Vietnam; U.S. slow to help - chicagotribune.com[/QUOTE]


----------



## georgephillip (May 17, 2013)

What's the common denominator?

I suggest we start with the three biggest money producing enterprises on this planet and see how the greatest purveyor of violence on this planet manipulates arms sales, oil sales, and illegal drug sales in order to concentrate 20% of the planet's wealth in the hands of about 4% of the planet's citizens.

And that's the good news.

The richest 1% of citizens living in the greatest purveyor of violence on the planet own about 34% of "their" country's total wealth and the next 19% of citizens own about 50% of the wealth.

The Vietnamese and Hezbollah and 80% of the rest of the planet are pawns in a game where the richest 20% of humanity benefit economically from industrialized violence like that visited upon Vietnam by the US Marines and the IDF war crimes perpetrated in southern Lebanon.


----------



## Hossfly (May 17, 2013)

georgephillip said:


> What's the common denominator?
> 
> I suggest we start with the three biggest money producing enterprises on this planet and see how the greatest purveyor of violence on this planet manipulates arms sales, oil sales, and illegal drug sales in order to concentrate 20% of the planet's wealth in the hands of about 4% of the planet's citizens.
> 
> ...


Looks like Georgie Boy needs a change of location.  He doesn't appear to enjoy living in this country which he constantly calls "the greatest purveyor of violence on this planet."  I believe he can take his Social Security check with him to some little town in Mexico where he will be able to live like a king and will stop obsessing over those he calls "rich."  On the other hand, maybe Georgie Boy would enjoy living in some Muslim country like Yemen where his checks will also go far.  I think he will have to buy himself a prayer mat to fit in though to be on the safe side.


----------



## MJB12741 (May 17, 2013)

Beats me why George stays here in a country he detests.  Is he a glutton for punishment?





Hossfly said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > What's the common denominator?
> ...


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 17, 2013)

JakeStarkey said:


> Israel is absolutely legally, ethically, and morally right in its missile strikes.


Not according to Article 51 of the UN Charter.





> > Tuff dat, you know, and, oh yes, Israel defended itself from the forces of seven Arab nations.
> >
> > And the wusses still lost.  And lost again.  And again.
> >
> > ...


----------



## RoccoR (May 17, 2013)

JakeStarkey, _et al,_

Well, not exactly.



JakeStarkey said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Israel is absolutely legally, ethically, and morally right in its missile strikes.
> ...





> Tuff dat, you know, and, oh yes, Israel defended itself from the forces of seven Arab nations.
> 
> And the wusses still lost.  And lost again.  And again.
> 
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

You have to ask the questions:  _(Basic Interrogatives)_

Yes, Syria and Lebanon can make formal complaints.  But then the ICJ Investigation would surely discover the involvement of Iranian Missiles, in violation of the export sanctions.  Both Syria and Lebanon would have to admit to allowing the illicite shipments, and thus be subject to sanctions themselves.

No, I don't think they want to do that.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip (May 17, 2013)

Rocco...do you see Syria becoming Somalia when this dust finally settles?


----------



## MJB12741 (May 17, 2013)

When the dust finally settles in Syria, the questions is who among them will be left to grieve for their departed?





georgephillip said:


> Rocco...do you see Syria becoming Somalia when this dust finally settles?


----------



## georgephillip (May 18, 2013)

MJB12741 said:


> When the dust finally settles in Syria, the questions is who among them will be left to grieve for their departed?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


*No one in PNAC, obviously:*

"The 2000 Project for the New American Century (PNAC), which was the backbone of the NeoCon&#8217;s agenda  was predicated on 'waging a war without borders'.  

"The PNAC&#8217;s declared objectives was to  'fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars' in different regions of the World as well  perform the so-called military 'constabulary' duties 'associated with shaping the security environment in critical regions'. 

"*Global constabulary implies a Worldwide process of military policing and interventionism*. (Project for a New American Century, Rebuilding Americas Defenses.pdf, September 2000)"

?War without Borders?: Obama?s ?Long War? | Global Research


----------



## Kondor3 (May 18, 2013)

Aren't PNAC and the NeoCons largely yesterday's news? Are they still in a position to influence world events? Are they still even relevant?


----------



## georgephillip (May 18, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Aren't PNAC and the NeoCons largely yesterday's news? Are they still in a position to influence world events? Are they still even relevant?


The economic goals of neo-cons appear at least as relevant today as they were when Truman institutionalized the concept of global military dominance at the outset of the Cold War. Every US President since that time has enhanced Harry's goal to one degree or another. The current president included:

"Under the Obama presidency, this global military project has become increasingly pervasive. Military escalation as well as the Worldwide deployment of US military might are an integral part of America&#8217;s 'long war' military doctrine, to which the current administration is firmly committed. 

"The nature of the long war was recently reaffirmed by the Vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Marine Corps General James Cartwright:

&#8220;[For the next] 'five to 10 years&#8230;. the military likely will remain engaged in the same kinds of conflicts it has been fighting since 2001 &#8230; [N]o one I know thinks we&#8217;ll be out of' these kinds of conflicts any time soon. There is nothing out there that tells us we won&#8217;t be wrapped up in these conflicts for as far as the eye can see.. &#8221; quoted in John T. Bennett, Cartwright: Expect war for 5-10 more..."

War is never "yesterday's news" in America since profit is always relevant to those who fund the best governement money can buy.

?War without Borders?: Obama?s ?Long War? | Global Research


----------



## RoccoR (May 18, 2013)

MJB12741; georgephillip,  _et al,_

If Libya and Egypt are any yard stick for comparison, then Syria will be in trouble.



MJB12741 said:


> When the dust finally settles in Syria, the questions is who among them will be left to grieve for their departed?
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Remember that the vulture circling in Iran.

After the Civil War concludes, there will be a certain amount of chaos and confusion.

If the Assad Government wins _(and that is a distinct possibility - Assad doesn't want to the way of Gaddafi or Murbarak)_, it will surely be weakened.  Russia is in it for the profit _(political capital and military sales)_ and not so much the reconstruction.  However, for Iran, Syria represents a gateway country to the Mediterranean.  It already has Iraq in its pocket and a foothold in Lebanon _(Hezbollah dupes)_, and it is working on improving its position in Syria - betting Assad is not going to wind-up trophy on somebodies wall.

If the Rebels win _(and that is by no means a foregone conclusion)_, there will be this period of internal struggle for power and control.  The Mujahideen, Jabhat Al Nusra Jihadist, Syria Hazem Badran _(al-Qaeda splinter)_, are the birds of prey here.  They have the weaker position, but are being supplied with Saudi weapons and Russian/American anti-tank missiles as well as Israeli supplied medical kits to combat chemical and nerve agent exposure.  The UK and France have taken a stand and have started supporting the Free Syrian Army _[(FSA)(Colonel Reyad Musa al-Asaad)]_.  COL al-Assad was recently injured in a car bomb assassination attempt, more likely conducted by his own, rather than the Assad Regime. The Syrian National Coalition _[(SNC) (the political aspect of the rebel movement)]_ definitely shows signs it is deteriorating.  With the resignation of the SNC Leader _(Mouaz al-Khatib)_, the Muslim Brotherhood _(Ghassan Hitto)_ seems to be gaining internal strength in the rebel movement.​
It is a mess.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## MJB12741 (May 18, 2013)

In Syria, no matter which side wins to rule the country, the Syrian citizens lose.


----------



## Roudy (May 18, 2013)

RoccoR said:


> MJB12741; georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> If Libya and Egypt are any yard stick for comparison, then Syria will be in trouble.
> 
> ...


Yes, had it not been for the dismal results and mismanagement of president Obama's much advertised Arab Spring, where all the countries affected so far have turned Islamic,  the US would have the political capital to intervene in Syria and prevent its citizens from getting slaughtered by the tens of thousands. 

Let us not forget that Obama started bombing Libya because he saw a "humanitarian mission" in preventing the slaughter of a people by its own army, yet he has stood by picking his nose when it comes to Syria, where over 100,000 of its people have been killed so far.


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 18, 2013)

Roudy, you can't have it both ways.  To suggest that Arab Spring was mismanaged indicates an unnuanced understanding of massive cultural conflict.


----------



## MJB12741 (May 18, 2013)

The USA & Israel should just stay out of any involvement whatsoever over the Arab Spring.  As long as they just kill each other, that's their own internal affairs.





JakeStarkey said:


> Roudy, you can't have it both ways.  To suggest that Arab Spring was mismanaged indicates a juvenile understanding by you of massive cultural conflict.


----------



## Lipush (May 18, 2013)

Oh, we _always _stay out of it. we have no business in _those_ places.


----------



## RoccoR (May 18, 2013)

Lipush,  _et al, _

History has shown us that the US doesn't know how to handle these interventions.



Lipush said:


> Oh, we _always _stay out of it. we have no business in _those_ places.


*(COMMENT)*

These never turn-out well for the US or the nation in which we intervene.  And our reputation just keeps getting worse.  We need to stay as far away as we can.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 18, 2013)

Actually in Israel's case, the nation has done well by American's turn out for it.


----------



## Lipush (May 18, 2013)

RoccoR said:


> Lipush,  _et al, _
> 
> History has shown us that the US doesn't know how to handle these interventions.
> 
> ...



I agree.


----------



## georgephillip (May 18, 2013)

Lipush said:


> Oh, we _always _stay out of it. we have no business in _those_ places.


"Operation Orchard[2][3] was an Israeli airstrike on a nuclear reactor[4] in the Deir ez-Zor region[5] of Syria carried out just after midnight (local time) on September 6, 2007. The White House and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) later confirmed that American intelligence had also indicated the site was a nuclear facility with a military purpose, though Syria denies this."

Israel's business is to stimulate arms sales in the Middle East.
Whenever any Arab state shows signs of developing weapons as advanced as the Jewish state's arsenal, Israel intervenes, as the North Koreans well know.


----------



## MJB12741 (May 18, 2013)

George, we already know how anti American you are.  But do you actually support nuclear weapons in the hands of our enemies?





georgephillip said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> > Oh, we _always _stay out of it. we have no business in _those_ places.
> ...


----------



## georgephillip (May 18, 2013)

MJB12741 said:


> George, we already know how anti American you are.  But do you actually support nuclear weapons in the hands of our enemies?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Do you actually support the murder, maiming, and displacement of millions of innocent Iraqis?
None of them would have suffered to that extent if Iraq had the same number of nuclear weapons as Israel.
You apparently define "American" as one who supports war crimes like the illegal occupations of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Palestine.
Most Americans don't.


----------



## Kondor3 (May 18, 2013)

georgephillip said:


> "..._You apparently define "American" as one who supports war crimes like the illegal occupations of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Palestine. Most Americans don't._"


Most Americans - rightly or wrongly - don't classify those things as War Crimes, so there is no conflict for them in supporting their Government's actions.

Really, I think your '_most Americans_' label is spread-about a bit too thinly on that  one.


----------



## georgephillip (May 18, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > "..._You apparently define "American" as one who supports war crimes like the illegal occupations of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Palestine. Most Americans don't._"
> ...


The fact that most Americans don't classify the US invasion of Iraq, for example, as a war crime has more to do with their ignorance of the formal definition of the supreme international crime than with any level of support for their government's murder, maiming, displacement, and incarceration of millions of Iraqi civilians.


----------



## RoccoR (May 18, 2013)

georgephillip,  _et al,_

I think our friend Kondor3 is correct.



Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > "..._You apparently define "American" as one who supports war crimes like the illegal occupations of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Palestine. Most Americans don't._"
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Forces in Afghanistan are there under Strategic Partnership Agreement (SPA); not an "occupation."    US forces have never been in Palestine under a combat or mutual defense pact deployment.  And the US contingent to MNFI was there under UNSC Mandate after June 2004, and a SOFA after 2008; not an "occupation."

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip (May 18, 2013)

Rocco...did the UNSC authorize the invasion of Iraq or did Saddam present a threat to Wall Street?
I'm guessing not too many Afghans got to vote on that SPA.
It's hardly surprising the solo superpower finds legalese to hide its occupations behind, but that doesn't soften the suffering of millions of innocent Muslim civilians or the amount of money Pentagon elites earn from their "service."


----------



## Kondor3 (May 18, 2013)

RoccoR said:


> _History has shown us that the US doesn't know how to handle these interventions._


Agreed. You seem a thoughtful fellow. Do you have any speculation-caliber insight into why this might be? I have a few odds-and-ends myself (frequent shifts in policy, always expecting to be liked, not knowing when to walk-away rather than rebuild, enlisting internal bad-guys to assist, bulldozing past local culture and customs, taking sides too early or choosing the wrong side, etc.) but nothing particularly coherent.


----------



## MJB12741 (May 18, 2013)

Most Arab countries want no foreign involvement in their internal affairs & issues.  Therefore, the USA & Israel all other foreign countries should respect their wishes & let the Arabs settle their own problems in their own countries in their own way.

Well, maybe we could at least show we care by just sending body bags.


----------



## RoccoR (May 18, 2013)

georgephillip,  _et al,_

The complicated way in which we got to Iraq, is going to be argued for as long as the Kennedy Assassination, and 9/11 Conspiracy Nuts live.  The White House presented its case and our nation sent-out a called to arms.



georgephillip said:


> Rocco...did the UNSC authorize the invasion of Iraq or did Saddam present a threat to Wall Street?
> I'm guessing not too many Afghans got to vote on that SPA.
> It's hardly surprising the solo superpower finds legalese to hide its occupations behind, but that doesn't soften the suffering of millions of innocent Muslim civilians or the amount of money Pentagon elites earn from their "service."


*(COMMENT)*

"legalese to hide its occupations behind"

It is what it is.  It is how we do things in America.​
"suffering of millions of innocent Muslim civilians"

All war has consequences.  Rarely is there a war in which the civilians don't suffer in one capacity or another.​
"the amount of money Pentagon elites earn from their "service."

At the end of the "Cold War" there was this thing cold the "Cold War Dividend."  It allowed Congress to reduce the size of the Armed Forces and the defense budget accordingly; redirecting the those resources to other programs.  The reduction was made possible by the skillful reduction in the combat support and combat service support activities, transferring those functions the the Guard and Reserve, while planning the contract out critical skills and service on an as needed basis.  It was the Congressionally approved approach for the Pentagon.​
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip (May 18, 2013)

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> The complicated way in which we got to Iraq, is going to be argued for as long as the Kennedy Assassination, and 9/11 Conspiracy Nuts live.  The White House presented its case and our nation sent-out a called to arms.
> 
> ...


"Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?"

Einstein, Russell and other intellectual giants asked this question half-a-century ago.
What if it's Natural Selection (Upper Division)
Any specie that kills its young for money or glory is hardwired to self-destruct?
Possibly about the time its weapons begin leaving its planet's surface...

Russell-Einstein Manifesto


----------



## MJB12741 (May 18, 2013)

You speak as if there is never a need for war.  As if war is always just evil & the antithesis of peace.

Well George, for your education, lets consider the facts.  If not for war the USA would still be a British colony under British rule.  If not for war, Hitler would have ruled the world.  If not for war, Japan would not be our ally & trading partner.  And if not for war, Jordan would not be living in peace from the Palesinians.  

When all else has failed to establish peace, give war a chance.




georgephillip said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip,  _et al,_
> ...


----------



## georgephillip (May 19, 2013)

"When all else has failed to establish peace, give war a chance"

"FROM WOUNDED KNEE TO LIBYA:

A CENTURY OF U.S. MILITARY INTERVENTIONS

When has any US government given peace a chance?
Not in any of our lifetimes.
How did Canada become free from Royal Whim?
Hitler would have been an actor without Wilson's Great War to save Morgan's loans.

There would be no need for war if peace we more profitable.


----------



## MJB12741 (May 19, 2013)

So tell us George, how does ANYONE or ANY NATION even begin to negotiate peace with an enemy who prefers death over life?





georgephillip said:


> "When all else has failed to establish peace, give war a chance"
> 
> "FROM WOUNDED KNEE TO LIBYA:
> 
> ...


----------



## georgephillip (May 19, 2013)

MJB12741 said:


> So tell us George, how does ANYONE or ANY NATION even begin to negotiate peace with an enemy who prefers death over life?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If you're confusing Islam with my enemy, tell me the percentage of Muslims "who prefers death over life?"


----------



## kvetch (May 19, 2013)

MJB12741 said:


> You speak as if there is never a need for war.  As if war is always just evil & the antithesis of peace.
> 
> Well George, for your education, lets consider the facts.  If not for war the USA would still be a British colony under British rule.  If not for war, Hitler would have ruled the world.  If not for war, Japan would not be our ally & trading partner.  And if not for war, Jordan would not be living in peace from the Palesinians.
> 
> ...



margy bear bares her teeth of war thus:

"When all else has failed to establish peace, give war a chance." she says

you are a master of war are you?

we jews owe our immodest survival to uncle joe stalin's red army not the fookin yanx and to hitlers mistakes in attacking the soviet union

u don't know enough to wage an intelligent war; that's the problem with USA until Obama's intelligence came as a blessed relief

but you are a war apologist rather than advocate or proponent, aincha?


----------



## MJB12741 (May 19, 2013)

Off your meds again, eh kvetch?




kvetch said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > You speak as if there is never a need for war.  As if war is always just evil & the antithesis of peace.
> ...


----------



## Hossfly (May 19, 2013)

kvetch said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > You speak as if there is never a need for war.  As if war is always just evil & the antithesis of peace.
> ...


Ah, Meshugenah Yenta, stop your kvetching and lighten up.  Here, sing along with this German family.

A German Family, Friends of Israel, Singing Hatikva! | Israel Video Network


----------



## MJB12741 (May 20, 2013)

My oldest & best American friend since grade school is of full blooded German ethnicity.  I was best man at his wedding in his family's Baptist church.  





Hossfly said:


> kvetch said:
> 
> 
> > MJB12741 said:
> ...


----------



## MJB12741 (May 20, 2013)

Sooner or later Israel's enemies will realize that Israel WILL defend itself against enemy weapons being supplied by the terrorist organizations.  The big question is how many enemies will Israel be forced to kill before they understand that?


----------



## georgephillip (May 21, 2013)

MJB12741 said:


> Sooner or later Israel's enemies will realize that Israel WILL defend itself against enemy weapons being supplied by the terrorist organizations.  The big question is how many enemies will Israel be forced to kill before they understand that?


"The following is a list of United Nations resolutions that concern both Israel and Palestine and bordering states such as Lebanon. The Human Rights Council has adopted more resolutions condemning Israel than it has all other states combined.[1]"

I guess you're counting the UNHRC as one of Israel's enemies?


----------



## member (May 21, 2013)

georgephillip said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > So tell us George, how does ANYONE or ANY NATION even begin to negotiate peace with an enemy who prefers death over life?
> ...



*"my enemy"*

i must of missed it:  

 who is that ?


----------



## RoccoR (May 21, 2013)

_et al,_

I'm confused again, please forgive me.



georgephillip said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > Sooner or later Israel's enemies will realize that Israel WILL defend itself against enemy weapons being supplied by the terrorist organizations.  The big question is how many enemies will Israel be forced to kill before they understand that?
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

You don't have to go into detail, but give me a short list (thumbnail - sound bite) of UNHRC issues with Israel.  Let's see if there is something there?

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip (May 21, 2013)

member said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > MJB12741 said:
> ...


It's not the 90% of Muslims who prefer life over death.
You?


----------



## georgephillip (May 21, 2013)

RoccoR said:


> _et al,_
> 
> I'm confused again, please forgive me.
> 
> ...


I sense that I will get into a lot of trouble delving into details of this matter with you, Rocco; however, why don't we take it from the top?

"From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

UN Security Council
Resolution 42
Date:	March 5 1948
Meeting no.:	263
Code:	S/691 (Document)
Vote:	For: 8 Abs.: 3 Against: 0
Subject:	The Palestine question
Result:	Adopted

"United Nations Security Council Resolution 42, adopted on March 5, 1948, called upon the permanent members of the Council to consult and inform it regarding the situation in Palestine and to make recommendations to the United Nations Palestine Commission. The Resolution also appealed to all governments and peoples, particularly those around Palestine to aid the situation in any way possible.

The resolution was adopted with eight votes to none and abstentions from Argentina, Syria and the *United Kingdom*.

Do you happen to know why the UK abstained from voting on this Resolution? 

United Nations Security Council Resolution 42 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## RoccoR (May 21, 2013)

georgephillip,  _et al,_

I'm not sure that there is any hard data on how many Muslims have this "I want to be a martyr" syndrome.



georgephillip said:


> member said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

But it is not like it is an unknown quantity.  The The 19-year-old Tsarnaev kid from Boston called his brother Tamerlan Tsarnaev, a martyr. 



			
				Dr. Essam El-Erian said:
			
		

> "I salute the steadfast people in all parts of Palestine. I greet you all on the anniversary of persistence in demanding the right of return (to Palestine) rather than compensation. I fully support you, and I pray to God to accept all the martyrs of Palestine in highest Heavens."
> 
> _*SOURCE: *_ Erian on Nakba: Palestinian People Will Not Accept Humiliation; Will Inevitably Triumph - Ikhwanweb



I had to hunt for this one.  It is, understandably, a rare image.  But it hits several of the issues all at one.





_*2011 LINK --->*_ Martyrdom in Islam | Alisina.org​
When mounting a total defensive posture, one must have a working knowledge of the enemy and the risk they will take to reach their objective.  In the case of a suicide bomber, danger and risk of life are not valued the same as other culture.  Death is merely the medium of exchange for martyrdom.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (May 21, 2013)

georgephillip; _et al,_

*(REFERENCE)*


_*LINK:*_ United Nations Official Document UNSC Resolution 42 (1948) 5 MARCH


_*LINK:*_
Memorandum by His Britannic Majesty's Government presented in 1947 to the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine Published at Jerusalem, 1947  A/AC.14/8 of 2 October 1947


_*LINK:*_
U.K. ACCEPTS UNSCOP GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS;
Will Not Implement Policy Unacceptable by Both Arabs and Jews
Palestine question - UK accepts UNSCOP recommendations, will not implement policy unless accepted by Arabs and Jews - Press release (26 September 1947)


_*LINK:*_
Resolution 181 (II). Future government of Palestine
A/RES/181(II) of 29 November 1947

Separate SIDEBAR reference listed below in Palestinian quotation.

*(DIALOG)*

UNSC 42 is a conciliation requirement (nothing more); the topic of the conciliation:  Prevent or Reduce disorder in Palestine.



georgephillip said:


> _et al,_
> 
> I sense that I will get into a lot of trouble delving into details of this matter with you, Rocco; however, why don't we take it from the top?
> 
> ...


*(THE QUESTION)*

Do you happen to know why the UK abstained from voting on this Resolution?
*(PREFACE)*

It starts 8 months prior when the (July '47) when His Majesty&#8217;s Foreign Secretary announces, in part, that "His Majesty&#8217;s government have of themselves no power, under the terms of the Mandate, to award the country either to the Arabs or to the Jews, or even to partition it between them."  Faced with a dilemma, "We shall then ask the United Nations to consider our report, and to recommend a settlement of the problem. We do not intend ourselves to recommend any particular solution.&#8221;

Then, His Majesty&#8217;s government announces (Sept '47) that the UK accepts the recommendations by the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP); BUT!, "Will Not Implement Policy Unacceptable by Both Arabs and Jews."  This is also when His Majesty&#8217;s government formally states that the UK will plan for an early withdrawal of British forces and of the British Administration from Palestine.

Then come the GA Resolution 181(II) (Nov '47) which announces a Partition Plan, but does not require acceptance by both Arabs and Jews.  GA Resolution 181(II) follows the UNSCOP Recommendations.  Resolution 181(II) requests (but does not require) the Security Council take the necessary measures as provided for in the plan for its implementation.

*(THE ANSWER)*

The UK abstained because, as you can see, in the one case, it turned the matter over to the UN for resolution of the matter, and in the other case, it opposed the the mechanics of implementation (while accepting the concept).  So it left the matter in the hands of the UNSC.

*(CONFUSION)*

A bindding resolution is a "command" or a "directive" to the member; or a concept/plan in which other members are enjoined to assist in the accomplishment of an objective.  It is issued by the UN Security Council.

A non-binding resolution is legitimacy of a principle, concept, law, or program.  It is like all those UNHRC Laws, International Laws, and alike, that people are so fond of quoting but ignoring.  They state basic ideas that have been agreed upon by the membership.  The UN Charter is one such document.  The are issued by the General Assembly, or one of the major subordinate activities.

In the case of GA Resolution 181(II), it does not command or direct that either the Arab or Jew be apportioned anything specific.  It is an "offer" of sovereignty under the territory of the Mandate.  Either party had the opportunity to accept or reject.  They were not "commanded" to accept or reject.

All the international laws and treaties are made this same way.  Just as all the nations of the Middle East (except Saudi Arabia) were established this same way (from the Persian Gulf to the Mediterranean Sea).  Even Egypt was a Protectorate of the UK before it was granted sovereignty.

There is this argument that because it wasn't approved by the UNSC, that GA Resolution 181(II) was not enacted or implemented.  Oddly enough, this is the Israeli Position and not a Palestinian Position.  The Palestinians see the dilemma of the argument and have recognized GA Resolution 181(II) as legitimate.



			
				(Signed) Nasser AL-KIDWA said:
			
		

> For the Palestinian side, and since the strategic decision to forge a peace on the basis of coexistence, resolution 181 (II) has become acceptable. The resolution provides the legal basis for the existence of both the Jewish and the Arab States in Mandated Palestine. According to the resolution, Jerusalem should become a corpus separatum, which the Palestinian side is willing to take into consideration and to reconcile with the Palestinian position that East Jerusalem is part of the Palestinian territory and the capital of the Palestinian State. *The Palestinian side adheres to international legitimacy and respects General Assembly resolution 181 (II)*, as well as Security Council resolution 242 (1967), the implementation of which is the aim of the current Middle East peace process.
> 
> A/53/879
> S/1999/334
> ...



I hope I was able to answer your question.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## MJB12741 (May 21, 2013)

Feel the Palestinian pride.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-6LCGrkhJ5.../s1600/Palestinian+Children+Dying+To+Kill.jpg


----------



## member (May 21, 2013)

georgephillip said:


> member said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...







Fuck this SICK "RELGION" called ISLAMe !  ALL OF IT.


----------



## georgephillip (May 21, 2013)

member said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > member said:
> ...


Why don't you do the math.
How many citizens of Bensonhurst Brooklyn have Muslims maimed, murdered, displaced, and incarcerated in the last twenty years?
Now compare that number to the number of Iraqi civilians murdered by USA Christians in Baghdad and Basra.


----------



## georgephillip (May 21, 2013)

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip; _et al,_
> 
> *(REFERENCE)*
> 
> ...


You always do, Rocco. Thanks.
I need a few hours to formulate a half-way respectable response to the information you provided, but there is one glaringly obvious option that seems to have been missed by the UN and the UK: Why wasn't a referendum called for in Palestine in 1948 that would have provided at least a thin veneer of democratic intent?


----------



## RoccoR (May 21, 2013)

georgephillip; _et al,_

This is a good question for the 21st Century.



georgephillip said:


> Why wasn't a referendum called for in Palestine in 1948 that would have provided at least a thin veneer of democratic intent?


*(COMMENT)*

This is answered by another question.

*Q:*  Was there ever a time when any of the Arab nations in the region held a "referendum?"

*A:*  No​

EGYPT:  28 February 1922 (from UK protectorate status)
IRAQ:  3 October 1932 (from League of Nations mandate under British administration)
JORDAN:  25 May 1946 (from League of Nations mandate under British administration)
KUWAIT: 3 October 1932 (from League of Nations mandate under British administration)
LEBANON:  22 November 1943  (from League of Nations mandate under French administration)
SUDAN:  1 January 1956 (from Egypt and the UK)
SYRIA:  17 April 1946 (from League of Nations mandate under French administration)
YEMEN:  1918 (from the Ottoman Empire) and became a republic with the overthrow of the theocratic Imamate in 1962; South Yemen became independent on 30 November 1967 (from the UK)

The governments in the Persian Gulf and Middle East don't change by referendum.  You're lucky if they don't change by killing everyone in the previous government.  It is a violent region of the world.  They change through violence; like when the King and the entire Royal Family was gunned-down in the back of the Palace in Baghdad; or, what you see in Syria now.  Think Lebanon, they have more assassinations in one decade than the Roman Senate in 3000 years.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## MJB12741 (May 22, 2013)

Yep, it's a cultural thing.  And as long as they just kill their own people in their own countries as in Syria, let us wish both sides victory.





RoccoR said:


> georgephillip; _et al,_
> 
> This is a good question for the 21st Century.
> 
> ...


----------



## MJB12741 (May 23, 2013)

Egypt is still flooding the Palestinians tunnels from Gaza with raw sewage & has again closed the Rafah border to prevent Palestinian terrorists from smuggling weapons.  Interesting how there have been no Palestinian supporter complaints.  I guess that's not so bad compared to Israel's peace offerings, security fence & land concessions treatment of the Palestinians.

Foul sewage flooding raises Palestinian ire - Features - Al Jazeera English


----------

