EPTIsrael Bombs Palestine; Kills Hamas Leader - Page 38
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Sanctimonius
United Kingdom861 Posts
| ||
|
AttackZerg
United States7465 Posts
On November 16 2012 18:21 Sanctimonius wrote: Who by? They are the most technologically advanced and militaristic country in the Middle East, an impressive feat considering the dictatorships there. Iran is the only country strong enough to trouble them militarily, and that's only with their rockets. Israel would crush them if it came to a land war. If the US and the UK stopped supporting Israel, they'd face more terrorism and be even more determined to survive. I was not 'supposing' that it was a good idea to stop supporting Israel. Yes Israel is very strong. Unfortunately, without big international brothers, oil doesn't get delivered, parts, metals, tanks.... without american satellites some of their neat toys don't work, in fact without continued american support the iron dome goes away. Enemies? Saudi, Pakistan, Egypt , Syria, Iran, Iraq ..... every militant arab in the world. Could any nation other then the big 10 (us,russia,china,uk,france ect ect) do an immediate walk over, no, but it would not be hard to intercept cargo ships, cargo planes, the millions of things that they must import to maintain their military might. Israel has the most tenacious enemies in the world, without massive assistance they would fail. I do not wish that, or think less of them for the impressive civilization they have built in such a terrible climate, and I'm certainly not under estimating the incredible military minds and specialized personnel they have, but, give me 10 bases to flashes 1 turtle base, and even I could win (I hope!) | ||
|
zobz
Canada2175 Posts
On November 16 2012 11:01 Jockmcplop wrote: Its a shame that 'unfortunate reality' is so dominating. Its a shame that the 'unfortunate reality' is controlled by humans. Its also a shame that the 'unfortunate reality' is what holds our species back from becoming a more compassionate, just, and empathic species. If only we could do something to change it.... Oh wait... Yes we can change reality. Yet the ways in which we can change it at any given point is limitted first by physical laws and what is logically possible, second by our resources and third by our imaginations at the present time. And this is obviously his meaning of reality: if you can't think of a better idea, don't tell people they should let themselves die rather than act on what they know. And by the way, without humans, the world would not be better off. The world has no preference. It always comes down to the fact that it is we, humans, who prefer to live. If that's not a good enough reason for you, then you have no reason. That would explain a great deal about the irrationality of your view on how we should live. | ||
|
don_kyuhote
3006 Posts
On November 16 2012 18:33 AttackZerg wrote: I was not 'supposing' that it was a good idea to stop supporting Israel. Yes Israel is very strong. Unfortunately, without big international brothers, oil doesn't get delivered, parts, metals, tanks.... without american satellites some of their neat toys don't work, in fact without continued american support the iron dome goes away. Enemies? Saudi, Pakistan, Egypt , Syria, Iran, Iraq ..... every militant arab in the world. Could any nation other then the big 10 (us,russia,china,uk,france ect ect) do an immediate walk over, no, but it would not be hard to intercept cargo ships, cargo planes, the millions of things that they must import to maintain their military might. Israel has the most tenacious enemies in the world, without massive assistance they would fail. I do not wish that, or think less of them for the impressive civilization they have built in such a terrible climate, and I'm certainly not under estimating the incredible military minds and specialized personnel they have, but, give me 10 bases to flashes 1 turtle base, and even I could win (I hope!) History would suggest the enemies of Israel really don't have a good track record of cooperating and coordinating with one another in war. Not to mention most of them are not really ready for it anyway. Syria is a mess, Iraq is a mess, Pakistan too far, I don't see Saudi getting too involved, Iran is later. | ||
|
Elegy
United States1629 Posts
Why would the Saudis attack Israel? Like...what? that defies quite literally every core of Saudi foreign policy for the past thirty years. Pakistan? How does Pakistan attack Israel? Syria? Little bit busy, no? Iran? How does Iran invade Israel? Iraq? Surely you're joking. Egypt? hahaha The existence of Israel is under zero threat from external forces. The "only" exception is a nuclear Iran, and even that is stretching the limits of reality. | ||
|
Goozen
Israel701 Posts
On November 16 2012 18:32 Velr wrote: It's funny that you see the opposition to Israel as "automatic"... Maybe, just maybe there are reasons the general assembly thinks your committing crimes there... There was a statement that basically denied Jewish sites as being Jewish and passed with a majority. http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/09/the_palestinians_reveal_the_ties_of_jews_to_palestine.html Now although Rachel's tomb is questionable both muslims and jews view the cave of the patriarchs as such and yet denied any connection of it to Jewish heritage. The UN is a political body, and in 99% of the cases every Muslim nation will automatically vote against Israel, so thats why i dont think GA is relevant at all in this case, Or i could talk about the fact the UN focuses Israel the most even with far worse violation being ignored: http://www.adl.org/international/Israel-UN-1-introduction.asp | ||
|
Rolezn
63 Posts
Just sharing an interesting thing I've found. ![[image loading]](http://sphotos-f.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/417000_10100291699455985_1450254585_n.jpg) | ||
|
zobz
Canada2175 Posts
On November 16 2012 08:04 Art.FeeL wrote: Quite egoistical view on the world you have. Violence is often necessary? We aren't animals, we have the intellect and at least in theory we should be able to go along well with each other. When you start thinking that 'violence is often necessary' that means that you aren't doing everything to prevent it. We should be able to get along with each other, but when someone physically attacks you, you don't have that option. I'm sure this seems very cliche to you because you must've heard this argument before, but have you ever come up with a logically coherent objection to it? No we aren't animals, and it is by our rational faculty that we can tell the difference between our enemies and our friends, and someone who brandishes a weapon and explicitely says he intends to kill you is not your friend. If you think differently you're absolutely free to throw yourself before your enemies, in some valiant "sacrifice", but I am glad for Israel that they know better. | ||
|
Sanctimonius
United Kingdom861 Posts
Add to which Israel does have control of major ports and access to international waters and shipping and potential enemies who do not possess a real navy, plus incontestable air control of the Middle East barring someone like the US enforcing a no-fly zone. Yeah, Israel could survive and possibly even prosper. Iran seems to be doing well under UN sanctions. | ||
|
AssyrianKing
Australia2116 Posts
| ||
|
fluidin
Singapore1084 Posts
On November 16 2012 18:16 AttackZerg wrote: The U.N has condemned Israel dozens of times and does not support Israel. The question I think you meant to ask - What if the British and Americans governments stopped supporting Israel, what would happen? Answer: Immediate annihilation of the entire country inside of one year. I really doubt that. Even if support is withdrawn, will they not help Israel if they start getting invaded by the neighboring countries? Israel isn't one to wait while their supplies are being intercepted, if it comes to their cargo ships and planes being destroyed. Singapore's military is modeled after the Israeli's, which approach to war is a "swift and decisive victory". I imagine they will go on a full-on assault asap (see: six-day war), and how will that help the region at all? I expect Israel will want to go out with a bang, and a huge bang that will be. I do not doubt the tenacity of the Israelites, if worst came to worst I imagine they will drag down a disproportionate amount of enemies with them. The current face of middle east might be unrecognizable by the time Israel is annihilated. Which again, is highly unlikely. And does not do the region any good at all for both sides. In fact it probably does irreparable harm. | ||
|
Cuce
Turkey1127 Posts
On November 16 2012 18:11 AnAngryDingo wrote: sooo...what would happen if the UN stopped supporting Israel? un does not support isreal. they are condeming israeli goverments action pretty much every other month UK and US being veto members do not change that. | ||
|
Megelrov
Denmark95 Posts
The Palestinians are in no way right in using violence, and they, them self, have contributed to the whole mess. I must admit my sympathies, though not a for and against issue, lies with the Palestinians for the solo reason that they are the weaker power, and it is them that suffers the most in the current situation. How do you think that Israel would react if Hamas killed Ehud Barak( or someone in the top of the minister of defense(Roughly the equvilant of Ahmed al-Jabari who was assassinated by Israel earlier this week)? Im prone to think the response would be massive. We must remember that Hamas is democratically elected political party in its current form, and if we hold our democratic principles dear we must be able to accept their legitimacy. Sorry if i was unclear or misinformed. | ||
Noam
Israel2209 Posts
On November 16 2012 21:04 Megelrov wrote: How do you think that Israel would react if Hamas killed Ehud Barak( or someone in the top of the minister of defense(Roughly the equvilant of Ahmed al-Jabari who was assassinated by Israel earlier this week)? Im prone to think the response would be massive. Are you under the impression that the current escalation happened because Israel killed one of Hamas' chief terrorists? | ||
|
Grettin
42381 Posts
| ||
|
ECHOZs
United States499 Posts
On November 16 2012 21:07 Noam wrote: Are you under the impression that the current escalation happened because Israel killed one of Hamas' chief terrorists? The assassination took this conflict to a new level, there were talks of a truce before between both Israel and Hamas, any chance of that now is done. Here's an article by one of the negotiators http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/11/15/assassinating-the-chance-for-calm.html | ||
|
nucleo
292 Posts
| ||
|
Megelrov
Denmark95 Posts
On November 16 2012 21:07 Noam wrote: Are you under the impression that the current escalation happened because Israel killed one of Hamas' chief terrorists? Well dude, this is a very important point IMO, one mans terrorist can be another mans freedom fighter, i don't approve of violence on any level almost. In my humble opinion these boxes(terrorists and freedom fighters) are the biggest problems in situations like the one in your country. These different ways of thinking aka boxes make compromise almost imposible, it is like 2 ppl trying to negotiate a really complex deal while talking in different languages. | ||
|
Megelrov
Denmark95 Posts
On November 16 2012 21:15 nucleo wrote: I guess he is just misinformed about the hundred of rockets fired at Israel a few weeks prior and up to that point. No i am not, and i deplore the actions and the tragedy, but to have me think that this is somehow a single incident and not related directly to the historic event of the last 50 years is absurd. | ||
|
bahunto28
Canada262 Posts
On November 16 2012 21:07 Noam wrote: Are you under the impression that the current escalation happened because Israel killed one of Hamas' chief terrorists? yes noam, he is under that impression. the four israeli soldiers who survived the antitank missle last saturday did not make international press, nor did the waves of rockets that the south was enduring for months/years. only after israel finally decides to respond, the world media gets interested. stay safe. | ||
| ||
