Most Palestinians see fresh peace talks as error

[SherriMunnerlyn]

Listen to the truth from a man whose father was a General in that war.

 

[Billo_Really]

For every latter-day revisionist statement you can find which pompously declares that Israel was not justified in preemptively striking at the Arab forces...

It actually goes way beyond "justified", it was illegal.

There are only two ways you can legally attack another nation. And that is codified in Article 51 of the UN Charter. Since Israel is a member state, they are duty bound to honor that Charter.

Why join an organization, if you have no intention of following their rules?

But all that is not news. The whole world knows you make up your reasons to attack, after the fact. And they're not very good lies.

 

[Kondor3]

For every latter-day revisionist statement you can find which pompously declares that Israel was not justified in preemptively striking at the Arab forces...

It actually goes way beyond "justified", it was illegal.

There are only two ways you can legally attack another nation. And that is codified in Article 51 of the UN Charter. Since Israel is a member state, they are duty bound to honor that Charter.

Why join an organization, if you have no intention of following their rules?

But all that is not news. The whole world knows you make up your reasons to attack, after the fact. And they're not very good lies.

We can argue the effects of Article 51 and the applicability or integration of both preexisting and subsequent International Law in the matter of preemption or imminent threat some other time.

Meanwhile, I want to be very clear about something.

If you were the Israeli Prime Minister, and tasked with the defense of Israel...

If Nassar had mobilized, blockaded your port, finalized war-alliances with your other neighbors, declared his intention to destroy you in the next few days, and massed his deployed forces snug up against your borders...

If Nassar had 30 or more modern jet heavy bombers (Tupelov-16s), capable of carrying 20,000 lbs of bombs each and dropping from high altitudes, screened by scores of modern Soviet Mig-21 fighter escorts, on Egyptian airfields, as well as light and medium bombers and fighter escorts in Syria, Jordan and Iraq - all mustered and ready to strike...

Then you, as Israeli Prime Minister, would wait until those warplanes had crossed into Israeli airspace, at near-supersonic speeds - mere seconds or minutes from any strategic or tactical target in the entire country...

Knowing that by doing so, many of those enemy bombers would succeed in making it past your defenses, and would strike at Tel-Aviv and other civilian cities and towns, triggering hundreds, perhaps many thousands, of Israeli civilian casualties...

Knowing that by doing so, many of your own war-assets (airfields, air-squadrons, armored formations, troop concentrations, etc.) might suffer irreparable damage and cripple your nation's ability to defend itself from attack on all sides?

All in the name of Observance of the Letter of International Law?

Really?

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

Israel knew Egypt was not going to attack.

The preemptive strikes were all about more land grabs.

That is what my sources prove to be true.

 

[Bloodrock44]

Israel knew Egypt was not going to attack.

The preemptive strikes were all about more land grabs.

That is what my sources prove to be true.

Bullshit lying slime bucket. Your sources? Hamas? Hezbollah? Al Qaeda? Hey Sherri...suck on this...'48, '56, '67 and '73.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

Six Day War - Historical Documents

Click on link to CIA Analysis and see how all knew before a potential war that Israel would win such a war.

The Myth that Israel's winning this war was some kind of miracle is just that, a myth.

And it certainly appears the US is encouraging Israel to engage in unlawful preemptive strikes, this declassified document.

 

[Alfalfa]

For every latter-day revisionist statement you can find which pompously declares that Israel was not justified in preemptively striking at the Arab forces...

It actually goes way beyond "justified", it was illegal.

There are only two ways you can legally attack another nation. And that is codified in Article 51 of the UN Charter. Since Israel is a member state, they are duty bound to honor that Charter.

Why join an organization, if you have no intention of following their rules?

But all that is not news. The whole world knows you make up your reasons to attack, after the fact. And they're not very good lies.

We can argue the effects of Article 51 and the applicability or integration of both preexisting and subsequent International Law in the matter of preemption or imminent threat some other time.

Meanwhile, I want to be very clear about something.

If you were the Israeli Prime Minister, and tasked with the defense of Israel...

If Nassar had mobilized, blockaded your port, finalized war-alliances with your other neighbors, declared his intention to destroy you in the next few days, and massed his deployed forces snug up against your borders...

If Nassar had 30 or more modern jet heavy bombers (Tupelov-16s), capable of carrying 20,000 lbs of bombs each and dropping from high altitudes, screened by scores of modern Soviet Mig-21 fighter escorts, on Egyptian airfields, as well as light and medium bombers and fighter escorts in Syria, Jordan and Iraq - all mustered and ready to strike...

Then you, as Israeli Prime Minister, would wait until those warplanes had crossed into Israeli airspace, at near-supersonic speeds - mere seconds or minutes from any strategic or tactical target in the entire country...

Knowing that by doing so, many of those enemy bombers would succeed in making it past your defenses, and would strike at Tel-Aviv and other civilian cities and towns, triggering hundreds, perhaps many thousands, of Israeli civilian casualties...

Knowing that by doing so, many of your own war-assets (airfields, air-squadrons, armored formations, troop concentrations, etc.) might suffer irreparable damage and cripple your nation's ability to defend itself from attack on all sides?

All in the name of Observance of the Letter of International Law?

Really?

Almost the entirety of egypt's air force was sitting on the ground cooling it's heels.

Ya, they were going to attack...heheh.

 

[Alfalfa]

Six Day War - Historical Documents

Click on link to CIA Analysis and see how all knew before a potential war that Israel would win such a war.

The Myth that Israel's winning this war was some kind of miracle is just that, a myth.

And it certainly appears the US is encouraging Israel to engage in unlawful preemptive strikes, this declassified document.

It's not a myth, it's hasbara.

 

[Kondor3]

"...Almost the entirety of egypt's air force was sitting on the ground cooling it's heels..."

Mustered, fueled, armed, with base-gates closed, and crews on standby, waiting for the Scramble siren; which, judging by the final maneuvers of Arab ground formations, was going to come within a matter of hours or a day or two or three.

"...Ya, they were going to attack...heheh."

Yes, they were. Nassar had already said so. And declared what he was going to do with them. And was conducting final deployments along Israeli's borders just prior to souding that Scramble siren.

Catching air-assets on the ground is how you win, and prevent the other guy from slaughtering your people, once they've already committed acts of war against you and publicly declared their intention to destroy you within the next few days.

Catching air-assets on the ground is an excellent and brilliant thing to do, under such circumstances.

And it paved the way for the Israelis to kick some major-league Arab ass... again.

Heheh...

 

[Hollie]

Six Day War - Historical Documents

Click on link to CIA Analysis and see how all knew before a potential war that Israel would win such a war.

The Myth that Israel's winning this war was some kind of miracle is just that, a myth.

And it certainly appears the US is encouraging Israel to engage in unlawful preemptive strikes, this declassified document.

That's so silly. It didn't take a miracle for Israel to win. It took better tactics, better trained troops and a well executed plan.

 

[Billo_Really]

We can argue the effects of Article 51 and the applicability or integration of both preexisting and subsequent International Law in the matter of preemption or imminent threat some other time.

Meanwhile, I want to be very clear about something.

If you were the Israeli Prime Minister, and tasked with the defense of Israel...

If Nassar had mobilized, blockaded your port, finalized war-alliances with your other neighbors, declared his intention to destroy you in the next few days, and massed his deployed forces snug up against your borders...

If Nassar had 30 or more modern jet heavy bombers (Tupelov-16s), capable of carrying 20,000 lbs of bombs each and dropping from high altitudes, screened by scores of modern Soviet Mig-21 fighter escorts, on Egyptian airfields, as well as light and medium bombers and fighter escorts in Syria, Jordan and Iraq - all mustered and ready to strike...

Then you, as Israeli Prime Minister, would wait until those warplanes had crossed into Israeli airspace, at near-supersonic speeds - mere seconds or minutes from any strategic or tactical target in the entire country...

Knowing that by doing so, many of those enemy bombers would succeed in making it past your defenses, and would strike at Tel-Aviv and other civilian cities and towns, triggering hundreds, perhaps many thousands, of Israeli civilian casualties...

Knowing that by doing so, many of your own war-assets (airfields, air-squadrons, armored formations, troop concentrations, etc.) might suffer irreparable damage and cripple your nation's ability to defend itself from attack on all sides?

All in the name of Observance of the Letter of International Law?

Really?

You do not punish someone for a crime they didn't commit.

And it doesn't matter how much battlefield logic you throw at the problem, if you attack a nation that didn't attack you first, you are guilty of "aggression". And aggression, considered the highest crime a nation can commit. Because it's no different than the Nazis going into Poland. None, whatsoever.

Now if I was Bibi, I'd be more like his son. I'd put everyone on alert, then sit back and wouldn't do anything until they actually started shooting, then I'd fuck up their shit!

 

[toastman]

We can argue the effects of Article 51 and the applicability or integration of both preexisting and subsequent International Law in the matter of preemption or imminent threat some other time.

Meanwhile, I want to be very clear about something.

If you were the Israeli Prime Minister, and tasked with the defense of Israel...

If Nassar had mobilized, blockaded your port, finalized war-alliances with your other neighbors, declared his intention to destroy you in the next few days, and massed his deployed forces snug up against your borders...

If Nassar had 30 or more modern jet heavy bombers (Tupelov-16s), capable of carrying 20,000 lbs of bombs each and dropping from high altitudes, screened by scores of modern Soviet Mig-21 fighter escorts, on Egyptian airfields, as well as light and medium bombers and fighter escorts in Syria, Jordan and Iraq - all mustered and ready to strike...

Then you, as Israeli Prime Minister, would wait until those warplanes had crossed into Israeli airspace, at near-supersonic speeds - mere seconds or minutes from any strategic or tactical target in the entire country...

Knowing that by doing so, many of those enemy bombers would succeed in making it past your defenses, and would strike at Tel-Aviv and other civilian cities and towns, triggering hundreds, perhaps many thousands, of Israeli civilian casualties...

Knowing that by doing so, many of your own war-assets (airfields, air-squadrons, armored formations, troop concentrations, etc.) might suffer irreparable damage and cripple your nation's ability to defend itself from attack on all sides?

All in the name of Observance of the Letter of International Law?

Really?

You do not punish someone for a crime they didn't commit.

And it doesn't matter how much battlefield logic you throw at the problem, if you attack a nation that didn't attack you first, you are guilty of "aggression". And aggression, considered the highest crime a nation can commit. Because it's no different than the Nazis going into Poland. None, whatsoever.

Now if I was Bibi, I'd be more like his son. I'd put everyone on alert, then sit back and wouldn't do anything until they actually started shooting, then I'd fuck up their shit!

Why wait for them to attack ? How do you know that it might not be too late?

It was a given that Egypt and Syria were going to attack, so what's the issue exactly ?
Do you really think that they would mass their troops and tanks, etc.. while threatening Israel, just for fun ???
Israel took out their air force BEFORE they could do any damage.. They had secret confidential info about where their airports were BTW.

It's called military intelligence

 

[Lipush]

We can argue the effects of Article 51 and the applicability or integration of both preexisting and subsequent International Law in the matter of preemption or imminent threat some other time.

Meanwhile, I want to be very clear about something.

If you were the Israeli Prime Minister, and tasked with the defense of Israel...

If Nassar had mobilized, blockaded your port, finalized war-alliances with your other neighbors, declared his intention to destroy you in the next few days, and massed his deployed forces snug up against your borders...

If Nassar had 30 or more modern jet heavy bombers (Tupelov-16s), capable of carrying 20,000 lbs of bombs each and dropping from high altitudes, screened by scores of modern Soviet Mig-21 fighter escorts, on Egyptian airfields, as well as light and medium bombers and fighter escorts in Syria, Jordan and Iraq - all mustered and ready to strike...

Then you, as Israeli Prime Minister, would wait until those warplanes had crossed into Israeli airspace, at near-supersonic speeds - mere seconds or minutes from any strategic or tactical target in the entire country...

Knowing that by doing so, many of those enemy bombers would succeed in making it past your defenses, and would strike at Tel-Aviv and other civilian cities and towns, triggering hundreds, perhaps many thousands, of Israeli civilian casualties...

Knowing that by doing so, many of your own war-assets (airfields, air-squadrons, armored formations, troop concentrations, etc.) might suffer irreparable damage and cripple your nation's ability to defend itself from attack on all sides?

All in the name of Observance of the Letter of International Law?

Really?

You do not punish someone for a crime they didn't commit.

And it doesn't matter how much battlefield logic you throw at the problem, if you attack a nation that didn't attack you first, you are guilty of "aggression". And aggression, considered the highest crime a nation can commit. Because it's no different than the Nazis going into Poland. None, whatsoever.

Now if I was Bibi, I'd be more like his son. I'd put everyone on alert, then sit back and wouldn't do anything until they actually started shooting, then I'd fuck up their shit!

Let me see if i get this,

Basically what you say is- I have to wait for someone to shoot me in the head, and only THAN I have the right to defend myself?!

 

[Billo_Really]

Let me see if i get this,

Basically what you say is- I have to wait for someone to shoot me in the head, and only THAN I have the right to defend myself?!

No. If someone points a gun at you, that's an imminent threat and you have a right to act upon it.

Massing troops at the border, is not the same as point a gun to your head.

For all you know, they could be doing war exercises and maneuvers.

I'm sorry, but that's the law! The law doesn't care if you like it or not, you just have to obey it, or suffer the consequences. And there will be consequences. Even if you have to wait until "judgment day", you will pay for all the crimes you have committed on planet earth. But, so will I.

And I'm thinking, before that day comes, maybe you and I should hook up and...

 

[toastman]

Let me see if i get this,

Basically what you say is- I have to wait for someone to shoot me in the head, and only THAN I have the right to defend myself?!

No. If someone points a gun at you, that's an imminent threat and you have a right to act upon it.

Massing troops at the border, is not the same as point a gun to your head.

For all you know, they could be doing war exercises and maneuvers.

I'm sorry, but that's the law! The law doesn't care if you like it or not, you just have to obey it, or suffer the consequences. And there will be consequences. Even if you have to wait until "judgment day", you will pay for all the crimes you have committed on planet earth. But, so will I.

And I'm thinking, before that day comes, maybe you and I should hook up and...

Billo, please read up on the 6 day war, because the phrase I bolded shows that you really never read anything about it.

Do you really think that Israel woke up one day, saw the Egyptian and Syrian troops by the border and said "Hey, lets go attack them, they MUST be getting ready to attack us first ! "

there was a lot of military intelligence involved. In fact, the pre war preparations is one of the most interesting parts about the war

 

[WillReadmore]

I hope this thread gets back to the actual topic.

We can go back and forth on the various wars all the way back to Moses and before if we want to, but that isn't really going to resolve anything at all.

I think it was a mistake not to divide the poll between Gaza and West Bank as I think there are significant difference between the two in how they are affected by Israel.

Also, there seems not to have been any real questions regarding what they DO want. Simply focusing on the talks is OK, as it at least addresses a current issue, but these people do have opinions about what happens to West Bank and Gaza.

 

[Kondor3]

...
Meanwhile, I want to be very clear about something.

If you were the Israeli Prime Minister, and tasked with the defense of Israel...

If Nassar had mobilized, blockaded your port, finalized war-alliances with your other neighbors, declared his intention to destroy you in the next few days, and massed his deployed forces snug up against your borders...

If Nassar had 30 or more modern jet heavy bombers (Tupelov-16s), capable of carrying 20,000 lbs of bombs each and dropping from high altitudes, screened by scores of modern Soviet Mig-21 fighter escorts, on Egyptian airfields, as well as light and medium bombers and fighter escorts in Syria, Jordan and Iraq - all mustered and ready to strike...

Then you, as Israeli Prime Minister, would wait until those warplanes had crossed into Israeli airspace, at near-supersonic speeds - mere seconds or minutes from any strategic or tactical target in the entire country...

Knowing that by doing so, many of those enemy bombers would succeed in making it past your defenses, and would strike at Tel-Aviv and other civilian cities and towns, triggering hundreds, perhaps many thousands, of Israeli civilian casualties...

Knowing that by doing so, many of your own war-assets (airfields, air-squadrons, armored formations, troop concentrations, etc.) might suffer irreparable damage and cripple your nation's ability to defend itself from attack on all sides?

All in the name of Observance of the Letter of International Law?

Really?

You do not punish someone for a crime they didn't commit.

And it doesn't matter how much battlefield logic you throw at the problem, if you attack a nation that didn't attack you first, you are guilty of "aggression". And aggression, considered the highest crime a nation can commit. Because it's no different than the Nazis going into Poland. None, whatsoever.

Now if I was Bibi, I'd be more like his son. I'd put everyone on alert, then sit back and wouldn't do anything until they actually started shooting, then I'd fuck up their shit!

Translation:

My question: "Then you, as Israeli Prime Minister, would wait until those warplanes had crossed into Israeli airspace, at near-supersonic speeds - mere seconds or minutes from any strategic or tactical target in the entire country...?"

Your answer: "Yes"

My question: "Really?"

Your answer: "Yes"

Did I interpret this correctly?

 

[theliq]

Six Day War - Historical Documents

Click on link to CIA Analysis and see how all knew before a potential war that Israel would win such a war.

The Myth that Israel's winning this war was some kind of miracle is just that, a myth.

And it certainly appears the US is encouraging Israel to engage in unlawful preemptive strikes, this declassified document.

That's so silly. It didn't take a miracle for Israel to win. It took better tactics, better trained troops and a well executed plan.

By America

 

[Kondor3]

Six Day War - Historical Documents

Click on link to CIA Analysis and see how all knew before a potential war that Israel would win such a war.

The Myth that Israel's winning this war was some kind of miracle is just that, a myth.

And it certainly appears the US is encouraging Israel to engage in unlawful preemptive strikes, this declassified document.

That's so silly. It didn't take a miracle for Israel to win. It took better tactics, better trained troops and a well executed plan.

By America

Are you trying to say that the United States won the 1967 War for Israel?

 

[theliq]

What a terrible and weak argument/comparison

If 3 people (Arab states) mass along your borders with tanks, troops while threatening to eliminate you, do you stand still or attack first ? You know fell well the Arabs were on their way to attacking Israel.

Thank God Israel had the balls to pre - emptively strike Egypt before they could do any harm

And you STILL haven't answered my question

Don't be such an IDIOT, Israel have Nuclear Weaponary,and would use it. Such pro Israel IDIOTS like this CRETIN.....thinks everyone is stupidyou fool

Yeah, but our Nuclear Weaponary only works on old ugly-bearded Persians.

But you won't tell on us, right?

As I said "Another IDIOTIC CRETIN" I rest my case.