On November 02 2011 01:17 B00ts wrote: I'd just like to point out... The fact that Israel is backed by the US is not the main reason they have won every war they have been a part of. They have the most highly trained armed forces in the world, the second "most deadliest" martial art in the world (second only to shaolin kung-fu), have mandatory military service(is this still true?.. Might not be anymore), and the terrain heavily favors defending it.
In fact that last time Israel was in a major conflict, the western powers had to figuratively beg them not to push into Egypt and Syria and take their capitols. (It actually might not have been the 'last' conflict... But one of the wars with egypt/syria.
In the first war, only miscommunication between the Arab forces prevented them from achieving victory. Later, the US provided cutting edge technology to Israel, which gave it a huge edge over it's enemies. One of the deciding advantages Israel possesses is its airforce, which alone allowed it to win many of its wars.
Technology wins wars. An unrivaled airforce is a huge deterrent. It's very demoralizing to fight against something that attacks out of the nowhere without a chance to retaliate.
Ok, Israel started the war with a larger standing force than all of its enemies combined. Not to mention the alliance had terrible cooperation, and general mistrust between each other.
Uh, what?... So Israel, which was freshly a new state, had a larger standing force than Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Iraq combined... And that those countries combined had less than 28,000 troops?.... Do you want to double check that?
Benny Morris has argued that although, by the end of 1947, the Palestinians "had a healthy and demoralising respect for the Yishuv's military power", they believed that in decades or centuries "the Jews, like the medieval crusader kingdoms, would ultimately be overcome by the Arab world".[40]
On the eve of the war, the number of Arab troops likely to be committed to the war was about 23,000 (10,000 Egyptians, 4,500 Jordanians, 3,000 Iraqis, 3,000 Syrians, 2,000 ALA volunteers, 1,000 Lebanese and some Saudi Arabians), in addition to the irregular Palestinians already present. The Yishuv had 35,000 troops of the Haganah, 3,000 of Stern and Irgun and a few thousand armed settlers.[41]
On 12 May, David Ben-Gurion was told by his chief military advisers, "who over-estimated the size of the Arab armies and the numbers and efficiency of the troops who would be committed", that Israel's chances of winning a war against the Arab states were only about even.
23000 + some random irregulars vs 38000 + some random settlers
On November 02 2011 01:06 Nash wrote: Yay another anti-semitic thread on TL. Let the jew-bashing proceed!
Dont be childish. No one is bashing Jews, people are just discussing what happened (Both in the last weeks and last century)
This.
Also, the US policies baffle me sometimes (a lot if I'm honest)
On November 02 2011 01:11 RageBot wrote: Now, I don't think that the governmant should keep most of the territory conquered, however, we just can't risk having terrorists getting even closer to our cities.
Catch-22 isn't it? Would the "terrorists" exist if they didn't perceive Israel to be stealing their land? Its a touchy and emotive subject. In South Africa years ago, the ANC were considered terrorists even though they were fighting for their rights as oppressed people. What makes what the Palestinians are doing different? One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. I don't say this out of any disrespect to people who have had losses of those near and dear to them, merely to point out the other side of the story.
Yes, they will exist. Or do you think that every other terrorist attack in history was because of Israel? Or things like what happened in Denmark/France after that cartoonist drew Mohammad?
They are not Freedom Fighters, they run from the military and aim solely for citizen targets, they are the exact opposits of Freedom Fighters. Not to mention that most of the money that Hamas gets for it's citizens is spent on military weapons and ammunition.
You're suggesting that terrorists will exist when they have no motivation? Your post is nonsensical.
So you're taking issue with the fact that Hamas, which exists in a state constantly being bitten into by a foreign country, which has the support of (arguably) the most powerful nation on earth (the US), spends money on it's military? How could they (sarcastic face)?
Oh yes, they are run by that well known Palestinian army, with it's great funding and co-ordination. If they aren't Freedom Fighters in their own eyes, then what does that make the Israelis when they drive tanks into Gaza?
No motivation? Killing Jews and destroying Israel is enough motivation for the fundementalist muslims. And, once again, Israel only attacks Gaza when there are attacks coming out of it, if there was any time in history when Israel attacked the Gaza strip without provocation from the Hamas, i'd like you to show it to me. You can also see the west bank, and realize that there's a reason there are no tanks attacking there.
You're suggesting that, were there no Palestine, Muslims would come from surrounding countries to kill Israelis? That Muslims all want to see the downfall of the Israeli state? That the people who live in Palestine do not have a motivation perhaps to try to free themselves from the terrible state they find themselves in?
A sixth of children in Gaza between 6 and 59 months suffer from chronic malnutrition, half the adult population are anemic. Gaza has one railway line, which no longer works. Gaza is 24th out of 135 on the world poverty index.
Props to the very few western countries with the balls to stand up for Israel when the Palestinian "government" tries to bypass bilateral negotiations by running to the UN. There is no possible solution that can come from a leadership that financially and operationally supports terrorism appealing to an anti-Israeli, anti-American body for a ruling completely on their terms.
The OP's spoiler was pretty whiny and resorted to the typical name calling and immaturity associated with hipster anti-Americanism. Along with calling (Canadian PM) Harper a dog, complaining that the US has influence on global organizations was pretty funny. It's a good thing they do have influence, otherwise these organizations would either be completely irrelevant, or worse, would be allowed to implement their anti-western agendas unchecked.
On November 02 2011 01:17 B00ts wrote: I'd just like to point out... The fact that Israel is backed by the US is not the main reason they have won every war they have been a part of. They have the most highly trained armed forces in the world, the second "most deadliest" martial art in the world (second only to shaolin kung-fu), have mandatory military service(is this still true?.. Might not be anymore), and the terrain heavily favors defending it.
In fact that last time Israel was in a major conflict, the western powers had to figuratively beg them not to push into Egypt and Syria and take their capitols. (It actually might not have been the 'last' conflict... But one of the wars with egypt/syria.
In the first war, only miscommunication between the Arab forces prevented them from achieving victory. Later, the US provided cutting edge technology to Israel, which gave it a huge edge over it's enemies. One of the deciding advantages Israel possesses is its airforce, which alone allowed it to win many of its wars.
Technology wins wars. An unrivaled airforce is a huge deterrent. It's very demoralizing to fight against something that attacks out of the nowhere without a chance to retaliate.
Ok, Israel started the war with a larger standing force than all of its enemies combined. Not to mention the alliance had terrible cooperation, and general mistrust between each other.
Israel didn't start the war, they were the ones who were attacked, not the agressors.
Replace the word started with began and you would have read his post as he intended it . He ment that at the start of the conflict they etc etc.
What he said was still nonsense... The Iraqi army alone had over 21,000 men in 1948, only 6000 short of Israel, and thats not counting Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan..... He's just making stuff up as he goes and contributing nothing.
On November 02 2011 02:05 Batdad wrote: Props to the very few western countries with the balls to stand up for Israel when the Palestinian "government" tries to bypass bilateral negotiations by running to the UN. There is no possible solution that can come from a leadership that financially and operationally supports terrorism appealing to an anti-Israeli, anti-American body for a ruling completely on their terms.
The OP's spoiler was pretty whiny and resorted to the typical name calling and immaturity associated with hipster anti-Americanism. Along with calling (Canadian PM) Harper a dog, complaining that the US has influence on global organizations was pretty funny. It's a good thing they do have influence, otherwise these organizations would either be completely irrelevant, or worse, would be allowed to implement their anti-western agendas unchecked.
The UN is anti-Israeli and anti-American? That, sir, is a claim I would like to see backed up.
On November 02 2011 01:17 B00ts wrote: I'd just like to point out... The fact that Israel is backed by the US is not the main reason they have won every war they have been a part of. They have the most highly trained armed forces in the world, the second "most deadliest" martial art in the world (second only to shaolin kung-fu), have mandatory military service(is this still true?.. Might not be anymore), and the terrain heavily favors defending it.
In fact that last time Israel was in a major conflict, the western powers had to figuratively beg them not to push into Egypt and Syria and take their capitols. (It actually might not have been the 'last' conflict... But one of the wars with egypt/syria.
In the first war, only miscommunication between the Arab forces prevented them from achieving victory. Later, the US provided cutting edge technology to Israel, which gave it a huge edge over it's enemies. One of the deciding advantages Israel possesses is its airforce, which alone allowed it to win many of its wars.
Technology wins wars. An unrivaled airforce is a huge deterrent. It's very demoralizing to fight against something that attacks out of the nowhere without a chance to retaliate.
Ok, Israel started the war with a larger standing force than all of its enemies combined. Not to mention the alliance had terrible cooperation, and general mistrust between each other.
Uh, what?... So Israel, which was freshly a new state, had a larger standing force than Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Iraq combined... And that those countries combined had less than 28,000 troops?.... Do you want to double check that?
Benny Morris has argued that although, by the end of 1947, the Palestinians "had a healthy and demoralising respect for the Yishuv's military power", they believed that in decades or centuries "the Jews, like the medieval crusader kingdoms, would ultimately be overcome by the Arab world".[40]
On the eve of the war, the number of Arab troops likely to be committed to the war was about 23,000 (10,000 Egyptians, 4,500 Jordanians, 3,000 Iraqis, 3,000 Syrians, 2,000 ALA volunteers, 1,000 Lebanese and some Saudi Arabians), in addition to the irregular Palestinians already present. The Yishuv had 35,000 troops of the Haganah, 3,000 of Stern and Irgun and a few thousand armed settlers.[41]
On 12 May, David Ben-Gurion was told by his chief military advisers, "who over-estimated the size of the Arab armies and the numbers and efficiency of the troops who would be committed", that Israel's chances of winning a war against the Arab states were only about even.
23000 + some random irregulars vs 38000 + some random settlers
You are comparing total troops available to Israel vs. total sent to battle from the arab states. What do you think happened when the arab states had casualties? Lost territory... etc... They had a shit ton more to fall back on.
Regardless, my original point has gotten away from us in this argument. And that is that the IDF is one of, if not the, best trained military force in the world
please note, that "highly trained" has nothing to do with technology.
On November 02 2011 01:17 B00ts wrote: I'd just like to point out... The fact that Israel is backed by the US is not the main reason they have won every war they have been a part of. They have the most highly trained armed forces in the world, the second "most deadliest" martial art in the world (second only to shaolin kung-fu), have mandatory military service(is this still true?.. Might not be anymore), and the terrain heavily favors defending it.
In fact that last time Israel was in a major conflict, the western powers had to figuratively beg them not to push into Egypt and Syria and take their capitols. (It actually might not have been the 'last' conflict... But one of the wars with egypt/syria.
In the first war, only miscommunication between the Arab forces prevented them from achieving victory. Later, the US provided cutting edge technology to Israel, which gave it a huge edge over it's enemies. One of the deciding advantages Israel possesses is its airforce, which alone allowed it to win many of its wars.
Technology wins wars. An unrivaled airforce is a huge deterrent. It's very demoralizing to fight against something that attacks out of the nowhere without a chance to retaliate.
Ok, Israel started the war with a larger standing force than all of its enemies combined. Not to mention the alliance had terrible cooperation, and general mistrust between each other.
Israel didn't start the war, they were the ones who were attacked, not the agressors.
Replace the word started with began and you would have read his post as he intended it . He ment that at the start of the conflict they etc etc.
What he said was still nonsense... The Iraqi army alone had over 21,000 men in 1948, only 6000 short of Israel, and thats not counting Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan..... He's just making stuff up as he goes and contributing nothing.
On November 02 2011 01:17 B00ts wrote: I'd just like to point out... The fact that Israel is backed by the US is not the main reason they have won every war they have been a part of. They have the most highly trained armed forces in the world, the second "most deadliest" martial art in the world (second only to shaolin kung-fu), have mandatory military service(is this still true?.. Might not be anymore), and the terrain heavily favors defending it.
In fact that last time Israel was in a major conflict, the western powers had to figuratively beg them not to push into Egypt and Syria and take their capitols. (It actually might not have been the 'last' conflict... But one of the wars with egypt/syria.
And the fact that their entire military is backed by the US and all their funding is from the US and all their military development is funded by the US so yeah they only won because they're backed by the US. Nor do they have the most highly trained in the world by any measure, though this depends on what you mean.
On November 02 2011 01:32 RageBot wrote:
On November 02 2011 01:11 Deja Thoris wrote:
On November 02 2011 01:07 KasdaTheEmperor wrote:
On November 02 2011 01:06 Nash wrote: Yay another anti-semitic thread on TL. Let the jew-bashing proceed!
Dont be childish. No one is bashing Jews, people are just discussing what happened (Both in the last weeks and last century)
This.
Also, the US policies baffle me sometimes (a lot if I'm honest)
On November 02 2011 01:11 RageBot wrote: Now, I don't think that the governmant should keep most of the territory conquered, however, we just can't risk having terrorists getting even closer to our cities.
Catch-22 isn't it? Would the "terrorists" exist if they didn't perceive Israel to be stealing their land? Its a touchy and emotive subject. In South Africa years ago, the ANC were considered terrorists even though they were fighting for their rights as oppressed people. What makes what the Palestinians are doing different? One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. I don't say this out of any disrespect to people who have had losses of those near and dear to them, merely to point out the other side of the story.
Yes, they will exist. Or do you think that every other terrorist attack in history was because of Israel? Or things like what happened in Denmark/France after that cartoonist drew Mohammad?
They are not Freedom Fighters, they run from the military and aim solely for citizen targets, they are the exact opposits of Freedom Fighters. Not to mention that most of the money that Hamas gets for it's citizens is spent on military weapons and ammunition.
Stop bending reality, Israel zionists were the first to use suicide bombers against the british when they ruled palestine. There is no "good" and "evil" side here.
No, it wasn't "Israel Zionists", it was "The Irgun", and they weren't "suicide bombers", they were just "terrorists", and, unlike terrorists among the Palestinians, they were hunted by the majority of the Jewish forces before Israel existed, and were outlawed and dismantled by the IDF. Now, the way Hamas and the Palestinians treat their Terrorists is completely different, did you see the parties thay had after Israel released their captives? Terrorists who killed old men, women and little children? Men who only fight for Allah to be Shahids, and don't care about their pepole? TV shows in which they teach children to kill Jews?
Are you aware that one of the reasons there are so many Palestinian casualties during war is because Hamas uses them as meat shields?
I also didn't "bend reality", what I said is 100% true.
What about the other side of the coin? For every Israeli casualties there are hundreds of palestinian ones. It is easy to cover your eyes and not accept the truth. I can link you a lot of videos and documentaries showing the humiliation Palestinians face everyday. I am not for the things Palestinians teach their children, but we get to the same point again: while someone looks at the recent conflict I am sure that Palestine didn't forget what happened to it in the last 60 years.
Your writing has a lot of hate in it and that is never good.
Hate? For whom? I didn't write anything about anyone who isn't a fundemental muslim. Also, consider this - Let's take the Gilad Shalit situation: Hamas took an Israeli soldier captive, they held him for five years, no one saw him, he didn't get any sort of visits from the Red Cross, no one saw how healthy he is, and no one knew anything about him. The guy's only crime was guarding Israel's borders. On the other hand, when Israel takes a Palestinian terrorist as a captive, they are usually men who have already managed to murder some Israeli citizens, yet they can constantly see their families, they get good healthcare, okay food, the red cresent can see them etc etc etc. Now, when Shalit was released, it was for the price of 1,027 Palestinian terrorists.
Hamas are the ones who set the precendant that the life of one Israeli citizen is worth the lives of 1,000 Palestinian.
Now for my real point - when one side is terrorizing another, even though they don't cause a lot of casualties, and are relatively weak, a country can't just let it's citizens get bombarded without doing anything, just because it's strong. So Israel gets to a boiling point, and than uses it's superior military weapons against a way more condense population, who also forcefully uses it's innocents as meat shields.
Obama is in a tough spot right now. On the one hand, I think he feels (and this is just my guess) that a two-state solution is worth a shot. The problem is that to pursue this solution would almost certainly mean political suicide. There's a reason a Republican won Anthony Weiner's seat in New York (in a district full of Jewish people) for the first time in a long time.
On November 02 2011 02:05 Batdad wrote: Props to the very few western countries with the balls to stand up for Israel when the Palestinian "government" tries to bypass bilateral negotiations by running to the UN. There is no possible solution that can come from a leadership that financially and operationally supports terrorism appealing to an anti-Israeli, anti-American body for a ruling completely on their terms.
The OP's spoiler was pretty whiny and resorted to the typical name calling and immaturity associated with hipster anti-Americanism. Along with calling (Canadian PM) Harper a dog, complaining that the US has influence on global organizations was pretty funny. It's a good thing they do have influence, otherwise these organizations would either be completely irrelevant, or worse, would be allowed to implement their anti-western agendas unchecked.
LOL I see, do you support democracy? If you do, you'll support this vote, which was UNILATERALLY in favor of Palestine. Why should the UN be pro-west? The population of the world living in western countries only amount to maybe a little more than 1 billion, or 1/6 of the world's population. Good thing UNESCO respects democracy.
In case you fail to see past the propaganda, if you remove the source of terrorism, terrorism will die out. What is the source of terrorism? Desperation caused by mistreatment.
On November 02 2011 01:17 B00ts wrote: I'd just like to point out... The fact that Israel is backed by the US is not the main reason they have won every war they have been a part of. They have the most highly trained armed forces in the world, the second "most deadliest" martial art in the world (second only to shaolin kung-fu), have mandatory military service(is this still true?.. Might not be anymore), and the terrain heavily favors defending it.
In fact that last time Israel was in a major conflict, the western powers had to figuratively beg them not to push into Egypt and Syria and take their capitols. (It actually might not have been the 'last' conflict... But one of the wars with egypt/syria.
And the fact that their entire military is backed by the US and all their funding is from the US and all their military development is funded by the US so yeah they only won because they're backed by the US. Nor do they have the most highly trained in the world by any measure, though this depends on what you mean.
On November 02 2011 01:32 RageBot wrote:
On November 02 2011 01:11 Deja Thoris wrote:
On November 02 2011 01:07 KasdaTheEmperor wrote:
On November 02 2011 01:06 Nash wrote: Yay another anti-semitic thread on TL. Let the jew-bashing proceed!
Dont be childish. No one is bashing Jews, people are just discussing what happened (Both in the last weeks and last century)
This.
Also, the US policies baffle me sometimes (a lot if I'm honest)
On November 02 2011 01:11 RageBot wrote: Now, I don't think that the governmant should keep most of the territory conquered, however, we just can't risk having terrorists getting even closer to our cities.
Catch-22 isn't it? Would the "terrorists" exist if they didn't perceive Israel to be stealing their land? Its a touchy and emotive subject. In South Africa years ago, the ANC were considered terrorists even though they were fighting for their rights as oppressed people. What makes what the Palestinians are doing different? One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. I don't say this out of any disrespect to people who have had losses of those near and dear to them, merely to point out the other side of the story.
Yes, they will exist. Or do you think that every other terrorist attack in history was because of Israel? Or things like what happened in Denmark/France after that cartoonist drew Mohammad?
They are not Freedom Fighters, they run from the military and aim solely for citizen targets, they are the exact opposits of Freedom Fighters. Not to mention that most of the money that Hamas gets for it's citizens is spent on military weapons and ammunition.
Stop bending reality, Israel zionists were the first to use suicide bombers against the british when they ruled palestine. There is no "good" and "evil" side here.
No, it wasn't "Israel Zionists", it was "The Irgun", and they weren't "suicide bombers", they were just "terrorists", and, unlike terrorists among the Palestinians, they were hunted by the majority of the Jewish forces before Israel existed, and were outlawed and dismantled by the IDF. Now, the way Hamas and the Palestinians treat their Terrorists is completely different, did you see the parties thay had after Israel released their captives? Terrorists who killed old men, women and little children? Men who only fight for Allah to be Shahids, and don't care about their pepole? TV shows in which they teach children to kill Jews?
I also didn't "bend reality", what I said is 100% true.
Great post there really, quoting 3 fundamentalist videos and saying "Look we're not like that!" is a great fallacy argument. I can look up as many videos as you want where jewish politicians, rabbins and scholars calling for the death of all arabs, how a thousand arab children are not worth the blood of 1 jewish boy etc etc. and articles of jewish soldiers testifying that their captains gave orders of execution on civilians including children.
Please either stay with facts and stop doing the whole "palestinians are worse!", nobody cares for that argument anymore, they're a broken people imprisoned by Israel. Why blames a wounded wolf in captivity for trying it's best?
On topic: The world obviously doesn't dislike Palestine more than it dislikes Israels blatant disregard of international law, and as they constantly proclaim themselves to be less worse than the Palestinies then shouldn't they be showing the way? Instead they keep doing what they're doing, the amount of Palestinians killed in ratio to israels is still over 100:1 and the world is getting fed up.
Okay.
Try and find a video that is broadcasted on national, govermntally owned public TV, which talks about the killing of Arabs.
On November 02 2011 01:17 B00ts wrote: I'd just like to point out... The fact that Israel is backed by the US is not the main reason they have won every war they have been a part of. They have the most highly trained armed forces in the world, the second "most deadliest" martial art in the world (second only to shaolin kung-fu), have mandatory military service(is this still true?.. Might not be anymore), and the terrain heavily favors defending it.
In fact that last time Israel was in a major conflict, the western powers had to figuratively beg them not to push into Egypt and Syria and take their capitols. (It actually might not have been the 'last' conflict... But one of the wars with egypt/syria.
And the fact that their entire military is backed by the US and all their funding is from the US and all their military development is funded by the US so yeah they only won because they're backed by the US. Nor do they have the most highly trained in the world by any measure, though this depends on what you mean.
On November 02 2011 01:32 RageBot wrote:
On November 02 2011 01:11 Deja Thoris wrote:
On November 02 2011 01:07 KasdaTheEmperor wrote:
On November 02 2011 01:06 Nash wrote: Yay another anti-semitic thread on TL. Let the jew-bashing proceed!
Dont be childish. No one is bashing Jews, people are just discussing what happened (Both in the last weeks and last century)
This.
Also, the US policies baffle me sometimes (a lot if I'm honest)
On November 02 2011 01:11 RageBot wrote: Now, I don't think that the governmant should keep most of the territory conquered, however, we just can't risk having terrorists getting even closer to our cities.
Catch-22 isn't it? Would the "terrorists" exist if they didn't perceive Israel to be stealing their land? Its a touchy and emotive subject. In South Africa years ago, the ANC were considered terrorists even though they were fighting for their rights as oppressed people. What makes what the Palestinians are doing different? One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. I don't say this out of any disrespect to people who have had losses of those near and dear to them, merely to point out the other side of the story.
Yes, they will exist. Or do you think that every other terrorist attack in history was because of Israel? Or things like what happened in Denmark/France after that cartoonist drew Mohammad?
They are not Freedom Fighters, they run from the military and aim solely for citizen targets, they are the exact opposits of Freedom Fighters. Not to mention that most of the money that Hamas gets for it's citizens is spent on military weapons and ammunition.
Stop bending reality, Israel zionists were the first to use suicide bombers against the british when they ruled palestine. There is no "good" and "evil" side here.
I also didn't "bend reality", what I said is 100% true.
What about the other side of the coin? For every Israeli casualties there are hundreds of palestinian ones. It is easy to cover your eyes and not accept the truth. I can link you a lot of videos and documentaries showing the humiliation Palestinians face everyday. I am not for the things Palestinians teach their children, but we get to the same point again: while someone looks at the recent conflict I am sure that Palestine didn't forget what happened to it in the last 60 years.
Your writing has a lot of hate in it and that is never good.
Hate? For whom? I didn't write anything about anyone who isn't a fundemental muslim. Also, consider this - Let's take the Gilad Shalit situation: Hamas took an Israeli soldier captive, they held him for five years, no one saw him, he didn't get any sort of visits from the Red Cross, no one saw how healthy he is, and no one knew anything about him. The guy's only crime was guarding Israel's borders. On the other hand, when Israel takes a Palestinian terrorist as a captive, they are usually men who have already managed to murder some Israeli citizens, yet they can constantly see their families, they get good healthcare, okay food, the red cresent can see them etc etc etc. Now, when Shalit was released, it was for the price of 1,027 Palestinian terrorists.
1) Fundamental muslims are people. 2) What about fundamental jews? 3) This ratio of exchange is because Israel HAS 1027 Palestinians to trade. Palestine does not.
You cannot argue with the hamas. It is impossible as long as they claim to "kill every jewish person". So as long as this stands you cant accept palestine. I wouldnt like to have a neighbour that would definatly kill me if he had the ressources. My solitary stands with the israeli people. And ofcourse theire are idiots on both sides the difference is the wide spread antisemitism in the arabian world and sadly that wont change soon.
On November 02 2011 02:05 Batdad wrote: Props to the very few western countries with the balls to stand up for Israel when the Palestinian "government" tries to bypass bilateral negotiations by running to the UN. There is no possible solution that can come from a leadership that financially and operationally supports terrorism appealing to an anti-Israeli, anti-American body for a ruling completely on their terms.
The OP's spoiler was pretty whiny and resorted to the typical name calling and immaturity associated with hipster anti-Americanism. Along with calling (Canadian PM) Harper a dog, complaining that the US has influence on global organizations was pretty funny. It's a good thing they do have influence, otherwise these organizations would either be completely irrelevant, or worse, would be allowed to implement their anti-western agendas unchecked.
LOL I see, do you support democracy? If you do, you'll support this vote, which was UNILATERALLY in favor of Palestine. Why should the UN be pro-west? The population of the world living in western countries only amount to maybe a little more than 1 billion, or 1/6 of the world's population. Good thing UNESCO respects democracy.
In case you fail to see past the propaganda, if you remove the source of terrorism, terrorism will die out. What is the source of terrorism? Desperation caused by mistreatment.
...Well, maybe because without the west there will be no modern medicine, technology, cars, industry, there will be even less food for poverty struck countries, there will be more wars etc etc etc etc.
That is, until China gets really strong and just goes and conqueres the world.
On November 02 2011 00:44 konadora wrote: uh, what kind of stupid law is that that forces a government to cut financial ties to a global organisation because of one country? on what basis?
It would be from their relation with Israel almost certainly.
sorry i'm not really into politics, but what was the relation between the US, israel and palestine? genuinely curious.
The super abridged version?
Israel and Palestine don't like eachother. Israel used to be small, Palestine used to be big. Now it's the opposite.
Check out this picture
Make sense?
Several wars happened that caused this, both started by Jewish and Arab aggression - it's a complicated issue that no one nation is faultless for.
On November 02 2011 01:17 B00ts wrote: I'd just like to point out... The fact that Israel is backed by the US is not the main reason they have won every war they have been a part of. They have the most highly trained armed forces in the world, the second "most deadliest" martial art in the world (second only to shaolin kung-fu), have mandatory military service(is this still true?.. Might not be anymore), and the terrain heavily favors defending it.
In fact that last time Israel was in a major conflict, the western powers had to figuratively beg them not to push into Egypt and Syria and take their capitols. (It actually might not have been the 'last' conflict... But one of the wars with egypt/syria.
In the first war, only miscommunication between the Arab forces prevented them from achieving victory. Later, the US provided cutting edge technology to Israel, which gave it a huge edge over it's enemies. One of the deciding advantages Israel possesses is its airforce, which alone allowed it to win many of its wars.
Technology wins wars. An unrivaled airforce is a huge deterrent. It's very demoralizing to fight against something that attacks out of the nowhere without a chance to retaliate.
Ok, Israel started the war with a larger standing force than all of its enemies combined. Not to mention the alliance had terrible cooperation, and general mistrust between each other.
Israel didn't start the war, they were the ones who were attacked, not the agressors.
Replace the word started with began and you would have read his post as he intended it . He ment that at the start of the conflict they etc etc.
What he said was still nonsense... The Iraqi army alone had over 21,000 men in 1948, only 6000 short of Israel, and thats not counting Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan..... He's just making stuff up as he goes and contributing nothing.
The arab forces obviously had room to increase their forces, and did so, meaning that before the war was over the arab forces outnumbered the IDF.
Israeli forces: 29,677 initially rising to 115,000 by March 1949. This includes the entire military personnel count—both combat units and logistical units.
115,000 military personnel. Also, 18,000 is quite short of the 21,000 you posted earlier.
Israel is free to increase their military commitment as well.
On November 02 2011 00:44 konadora wrote: uh, what kind of stupid law is that that forces a government to cut financial ties to a global organisation because of one country? on what basis?
It would be from their relation with Israel almost certainly.
sorry i'm not really into politics, but what was the relation between the US, israel and palestine? genuinely curious.
The super abridged version?
Israel and Palestine don't like eachother. Israel used to be small, Palestine used to be big. Now it's the opposite.
Check out this picture
Make sense?
This is essentially what happened over the past 70 years. Israel has accepted every single peace treaty presented and the palestinians have denied every single peace treaty presented, even the one giving the palestinians 95% of the land. The reason why palestine doesn't have a state is because they refuse to make one.
edit: and more on topic, the law came from one written back in 1990 if I remember correctly, so it's not like this is a surprise. I think the US should leave the UN and stop funding them anyways.
Oh I am pretty sure Assange has something to say about that.
Palestina made huge consessions and Israel never accepted.
Anyways, I hope they can solve the land issue in a non degrading manner and I applaud UNESCO for accepting them dispite retributions by old US laws.
On November 02 2011 02:09 Niall wrote: The UN is anti-Israeli and anti-American? That, sir, is a claim I would like to see backed up.
The UN Human Rights Council, which comprises esteemed pillars of progressive society like Cuba, China, Saudi Arabia, and very nearly Syria, has used fully half of its total resolutions since inception to condemn Israel. Granted, the positions of the UNHRC are often more extreme than the UN general assembly, but it could be argued that that is simply because there are vetoes in the general assembly.
On November 02 2011 02:05 Batdad wrote: Props to the very few western countries with the balls to stand up for Israel when the Palestinian "government" tries to bypass bilateral negotiations by running to the UN. There is no possible solution that can come from a leadership that financially and operationally supports terrorism appealing to an anti-Israeli, anti-American body for a ruling completely on their terms.
The OP's spoiler was pretty whiny and resorted to the typical name calling and immaturity associated with hipster anti-Americanism. Along with calling (Canadian PM) Harper a dog, complaining that the US has influence on global organizations was pretty funny. It's a good thing they do have influence, otherwise these organizations would either be completely irrelevant, or worse, would be allowed to implement their anti-western agendas unchecked.
LOL I see, do you support democracy? If you do, you'll support this vote, which was UNILATERALLY in favor of Palestine. Why should the UN be pro-west? The population of the world living in western countries only amount to maybe a little more than 1 billion, or 1/6 of the world's population. Good thing UNESCO respects democracy.
In case you fail to see past the propaganda, if you remove the source of terrorism, terrorism will die out. What is the source of terrorism? Desperation caused by mistreatment.
...Well, maybe because without the west there will be no modern medicine, technology, cars, industry, there will be even less food for poverty struck countries, there will be more wars etc etc etc etc.
That is, until China gets really strong and just goes and conqueres the world.
Without China, there would be no printing press, no paper money, no gunpowder, no compass. What's your point? You can spout could haves, would haves all you want, does not mean it would be that way. Also, the west is built upon democracy, when 88% of the world votes in favor of this motion, you sure as hell can't deny it. Unless you're a hypocrite of course.
On November 02 2011 01:17 B00ts wrote: I'd just like to point out... The fact that Israel is backed by the US is not the main reason they have won every war they have been a part of. They have the most highly trained armed forces in the world, the second "most deadliest" martial art in the world (second only to shaolin kung-fu), have mandatory military service(is this still true?.. Might not be anymore), and the terrain heavily favors defending it.
In fact that last time Israel was in a major conflict, the western powers had to figuratively beg them not to push into Egypt and Syria and take their capitols. (It actually might not have been the 'last' conflict... But one of the wars with egypt/syria.
And the fact that their entire military is backed by the US and all their funding is from the US and all their military development is funded by the US so yeah they only won because they're backed by the US. Nor do they have the most highly trained in the world by any measure, though this depends on what you mean.
On November 02 2011 01:32 RageBot wrote:
On November 02 2011 01:11 Deja Thoris wrote:
On November 02 2011 01:07 KasdaTheEmperor wrote:
On November 02 2011 01:06 Nash wrote: Yay another anti-semitic thread on TL. Let the jew-bashing proceed!
Dont be childish. No one is bashing Jews, people are just discussing what happened (Both in the last weeks and last century)
This.
Also, the US policies baffle me sometimes (a lot if I'm honest)
On November 02 2011 01:11 RageBot wrote: Now, I don't think that the governmant should keep most of the territory conquered, however, we just can't risk having terrorists getting even closer to our cities.
Catch-22 isn't it? Would the "terrorists" exist if they didn't perceive Israel to be stealing their land? Its a touchy and emotive subject. In South Africa years ago, the ANC were considered terrorists even though they were fighting for their rights as oppressed people. What makes what the Palestinians are doing different? One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. I don't say this out of any disrespect to people who have had losses of those near and dear to them, merely to point out the other side of the story.
Yes, they will exist. Or do you think that every other terrorist attack in history was because of Israel? Or things like what happened in Denmark/France after that cartoonist drew Mohammad?
They are not Freedom Fighters, they run from the military and aim solely for citizen targets, they are the exact opposits of Freedom Fighters. Not to mention that most of the money that Hamas gets for it's citizens is spent on military weapons and ammunition.
Stop bending reality, Israel zionists were the first to use suicide bombers against the british when they ruled palestine. There is no "good" and "evil" side here.
I also didn't "bend reality", what I said is 100% true.
What about the other side of the coin? For every Israeli casualties there are hundreds of palestinian ones. It is easy to cover your eyes and not accept the truth. I can link you a lot of videos and documentaries showing the humiliation Palestinians face everyday. I am not for the things Palestinians teach their children, but we get to the same point again: while someone looks at the recent conflict I am sure that Palestine didn't forget what happened to it in the last 60 years.
Your writing has a lot of hate in it and that is never good.
Hate? For whom? I didn't write anything about anyone who isn't a fundemental muslim. Also, consider this - Let's take the Gilad Shalit situation: Hamas took an Israeli soldier captive, they held him for five years, no one saw him, he didn't get any sort of visits from the Red Cross, no one saw how healthy he is, and no one knew anything about him. The guy's only crime was guarding Israel's borders. On the other hand, when Israel takes a Palestinian terrorist as a captive, they are usually men who have already managed to murder some Israeli citizens, yet they can constantly see their families, they get good healthcare, okay food, the red cresent can see them etc etc etc. Now, when Shalit was released, it was for the price of 1,027 Palestinian terrorists.
1) Fundamental muslims are people. 2) What about fundamental jews? 3) This ratio of exchange is because Israel HAS 1027 Palestinians to trade. Palestine does not.
1. Okay, and? The fact that an organizm has a DNA that is very similar to mine, doesn't mean that it should be treated with the same respect. I don't care if anyone is Asian, Arab, White, Black, whatever, if they are against progress, against human values, against education, against freedom of movement and thought (and they are) - a "man" like this should be treated as a beast, nothing more, nothing less. (That includes the way I think about most fundemental Jews).
2. Well, what do you consider "fundemental", if you talk about the number of pepole who would like to see the other side dead, than yeah, there are probably similar numbers (due to the fact that there are more Isralies), hoever, per capita, there's a major difference. If you are talking about the number of Jews who would actually go and kill innocent Palestinians, that number is way low than the number of Palestinians who actually went and attacked innocent Israelis. And just so you know, in my opinion Israel should just execute it's own fundementals who attack innocent arabs, but hey, I can't have anything, can I? 3. Well, so what? if these terrorists wouldn't have assaulted isralies they wouldn't have been taken catpive either, and nevermind that. If Hamas were thinking clearly, they would've known what to expect, you can't attack a country much stronger than you and not expect any sort of consequences.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_pEfVJ93Cwa8/TDjQIyH5mGI/AAAAAAAAGmk/EA9TbmokMRE/s1600/israel-palestine-map.jpg)
