Israel seemingly massing troops toward Syria

strandinthewind · #1 08-01-2006, 04:05 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/...ain/index.html

Does anyone else think the US wants this to happen?

strandinthewind · #2 08-01-2006, 04:11 PM

Here is why I say this, go to http://www.foxnews.com/ and look at the editorials - every one of them is PRO Israel. I get that Israel was provoked and was justified in its initial reaction. But, I am unsure going into Syria is such a wise thing. I mean the US effectively has done nothing significant to end this and seemingly it could. That makes me think something is going on.

shackin'up · #3 08-01-2006, 05:23 PM

retards. retards.

David · #4 08-01-2006, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Here is why I say this, go to http://www.foxnews.com/ and look at the editorials - every one of them is PRO Israel. I get that Israel was provoked and was justified in its initial reaction. But, I am unsure going into Syria is such a wise thing.

I think it will be a bloodbath the likes of which hasn't even been seen in that part of the world in several decades.

Quote:

I mean the US effectively has done nothing significant to end this and seemingly it could.

To end what? A possible invasion of Syria? or the situation with Hezbollah in Lebanon? Only Hezbollah can end what is happening in Lebanon. Hezbollah does not want what is happening to end--at least not for now. The entire gruesome war is going exactly according to Hezbollah's plans.

I've been asking myself what Hezbollah's motive or aim could be for firing continual rounds of rockets into northern Israel. I don't think the press has been asking that question. What *is* Hezbollah's aim--I mean specifically & right now--in firing rockets at Haifa & surrounding towns? Hezbollah could do any number of things at this point: send individual suicide bombers into Tel Aviv coffee houses; hijack airliners, hijack cruise ships; stir up a third Intifada among the Palestinians; etc. etc. Terrorists have many, many avenues of action open to them.

So why has Hezbollah picked this particular path at this time? I can think of three possible immediate aims:

1. To get Israel to fire back
2. To get Israel to fire back
3. To get Israel to fire back

But why would Hezbollah want Israel to fire back at southern Lebanon at this point? I mean, once again, what is their immediate aim? Again, I can think of three possible immediate aims:

1. To kill the Lebanese civilian bystanders
2. To kill the Lebanese civilian bystanders
3. To kill the Lebanese civilian bystanders

You get the picture. These are my views, by the way. Let's continue: And now why would Hezbollah desire the deaths of Lebanese civilians? There can be only one reason, one aim: If Israel is taking out civilians, the world stage of opinion turns against them, as it has repeatedly over the past 60 years. And that is precisely the definition of terrorism: to sacrifice innocent bystanders--civilians--in order to maneuver oneself politically.

I say that, as far as Hezbollah is concerned, everything is going according to plan.

madformac · #5 08-01-2006, 08:27 PM

They start messing with Syria then Iran will get involved.. Iran gets involved the USA wade in. Iran is within 12-18 months of going nuclear. All this will do is prepare them for the enevitable scenario.. They won't f**k about. They will act.

This one will go the distance if Syria gets invaded.. We all get involved until its over. No timeouts with this one.

They are all terrorists. Hezbollah, Bush, Blair, Putin, Bin Laden, Hussain.. All of them authorise the deaths of others for their own ideals.

The ironic thing is Israel will be the cause of its own destruction if this is the case.

In which case we are all f**ked...

What a strange race of creatures we are.

strandinthewind · #6 08-01-2006, 09:49 PM

Hiz. has no aim right now IMO other than to get the Arab world's sympathy and in that to support Iran, which wants a Nuke.

amber · #7 08-01-2006, 10:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Hiz. has no aim right now IMO other than to get the Arab world's sympathy and in that to support Iran, which wants a Nuke.

Oh, okay, good. I read/heard/saw last yesterday that it's obvious Bush wants this so he can go after Iran. Am I understanding correctly?

The middle east is so confusing.

tynan88 · #8 08-02-2006, 12:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Hiz. has no aim right now IMO other than to get the Arab world's sympathy and in that to support Iran, which wants a Nuke.

Hey y'all it's been a while but this issue frustrates me.
Isn't Israel the really dangerous country in all this...I mean they are the ones who do have a nuke so why is it OK for them to have a nuke but not OK for Iran to have it? I mean hasn't Israel had it for quite a few years to "defend" itself when there isn't really anything to defend against that is on any similar scale.

I know this might seem 'anti-Israel' and for some reason that is seen as really bad in America but I just have know idea what is going on.

macfanken · #9 08-02-2006, 12:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/...ain/index.html

Does anyone else think the US wants this to happen?

Umm... yeah, if it brings about the apocalypse then the Bushies will be for it. I really think we destabilized the entire region when we invaded Iraq and we don't have any kind of moral leg to stand on right now. We'd be hypocrites if we asked Israel to back off or if we called for a truce. I think we're seeing proof that invading Iraq was one of the biggest, most tragic mistakes in U.S. history.

David · #10 08-02-2006, 01:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tynan88

Hey y'all it's been a while but this issue frustrates me.
Isn't Israel the really dangerous country in all this...I mean they are the ones who do have a nuke so why is it OK for them to have a nuke but not OK for Iran to have it? I mean hasn't Israel had it for quite a few years to "defend" itself when there isn't really anything to defend against that is on any similar scale.

Israel is a parliamentary democracy--in fact the only parliamentary democracy in the entire Middle East, the only country in the Middle East with a tradition & history of consensual government. As the London Weekly Standard put it, modern democracies rarely attack America or each other. Israel also has the highest standard of living per capita & the highest literacy rate of any country in the Mideast. For Israel to have nuclear weapons is no more dangerous than for Britain or France to have nuclear weapons. (No comment about the United States!)

In addition, when was the last time you or anyone you know was afraid of being blown out of the sky by an Israeli terrorist on a flight to Madrid or Paris?

David · #11 08-02-2006, 01:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by macfanken

I really think we destabilized the entire region when we invaded Iraq

You thought the region was stable before that??

Quote:

I think we're seeing proof that invading Iraq was one of the biggest, most tragic mistakes in U.S. history.

Agreed!

tommer · #12 08-02-2006, 01:58 AM

let me clear some of the issues addressed here,

* the action in Baal-Bek that was mentioned here was by a small commando force, who made an effort to seize hizbulla leaders in that town. those forces are back in their bases by now. where were those hizbulla leaders hiding? in a HOSPITAL. for those who are wondering why so many civilians gets hurt in this war, there's a small hint for you.

* syria is highly isolated, and in a deep and ongoing economic crisis. its only arms are ancient soviet weapons, and israel can probably conquer that entire country faster than what may take the iranians to retaliate. the question is "what's the point?", coz in fact, there isn't one.

*

Quote:

Originally Posted by tynan88

Hey y'all it's been a while but this issue frustrates me.
Isn't Israel the really dangerous country in all this...I mean they are the ones who do have a nuke so why is it OK for them to have a nuke but not OK for Iran to have it? I mean hasn't Israel had it for quite a few years to "defend" itself when there isn't really anything to defend against that is on any similar scale.

I know this might seem 'anti-Israel' and for some reason that is seen as really bad in America but I just have know idea what is going on.

israel owns nuclear powers for like 40 years now, and they were never used, (which means they are in capable and responsible hands in case you are worried.) israel is threatened time and time again by some of its neighbours with complete and utter destruction, so the parallelization you are making is totally baseless, it's not a similar-scale threat, simply because israel doesn't threat to wipe out any arab state.
yeah, it's very nice and post-modernistic to think that everyone deserves the right to be armed the same way, but in actual fact you don't want to face an extremist islamic regime having those capabilities, at least I don't. my survival is kinda important to me.

Für Elise · #13 08-02-2006, 02:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tommer

you don't want to face an extremist islamic regime having those capabilities, at least I don't.

like many states don't want to face an extremist christian regime that has those capabilities and constantly threatens to use them

tuigirl · #14 08-02-2006, 03:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by madformac

They start messing with Syria then Iran will get involved.. Iran gets involved the USA wade in. Iran is within 12-18 months of going nuclear. All this will do is prepare them for the enevitable scenario.. They won't f**k about. They will act.

This one will go the distance if Syria gets invaded.. We all get involved until its over. No timeouts with this one.

They are all terrorists. Hezbollah, Bush, Blair, Putin, Bin Laden, Hussain.. All of them authorise the deaths of others for their own ideals.

The ironic thing is Israel will be the cause of its own destruction if this is the case.

In which case we are all f**ked...

What a strange race of creatures we are.

Oh great..that sounds really enlightning!!!! (she says sarcastically).
Mind you , it could quite easily be the beginning of the end. Who knows. I even read today on AOL news, that Shanghai has a secret underground nuclear fallout bunker underneath the city, capable of holding up to 200,000 people for something like a month (all supplies included, water, electricity etc)..hmm...smart cookies those Chinese....

tynan88 · #15 08-02-2006, 04:34 AM

Unfortunately it seems to me that the US has themselves in to a difficult position. For the record I don't think ANY nation has the right to nuclear weapons and the most dangerous fundamental nations in the world at the moment are yes still the Christians in my opinion who are responsible for more civilian deaths than any Islamic fundamentalist.

I still can not see how it is anything other than a double standard for the United States to allow Israel to have nuclear defences whereas essentially any Islamic nation is not and neither the Israelis or Muslims have used nuclear weapons!

Quote:

In addition, when was the last time you or anyone you know was afraid of being blown out of the sky by an Israeli terrorist on a flight to Madrid or Paris?

Isn't it true however that Israel just in the last few weeks recognised the 60th anniversary of the bombing of the King David Hotel by an Israeli terrorist group Irgun who were fighting for their cause for the foundation of Israel?

Although none of us may agree with the Syrian or Iranian cause or the cause of Hezbollah should we not at least be mindful of the fluid definitions we can attribute techniques such as terrorism or freedom fighting?