Pages: 1 2 3 4

Topic closed

2006-09-30 02:54:04
bogo24dk
Member
+26|6758
(WASHINGTON) The US congress has approved a USD 500 million aid package for the development of joint defense systems with Israel  .


The package was approved as part of the USD 447.6 billion defense budget for 2007, which includes USD 70 billion for the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.


The package comes in addition to USD 2.36 billion in military aid granted to Israel by the US each year.


Israeli officials welcomed the move, which they say underlines US confidence in Israel's defense industry.


The bill was passed by the House of Representatives on Thursday.



The Bush administration initially requests a USD 268 million increase to military aid to Israel, but the congress double that amount citing the importance of US-Israeli military cooperation.



USD 20 million of the package will be allocated to developing an interception system for short and medium range missiles. The system, known as David's Sling, will be developed by the Israel Armament Development Authority, Rafael, and US firm Raytheon.



The project is likely to be completed within six years, but both companies hope US and Israeli authorities will allocate the necessary funds for the deployment of interception batteries within a shorter time span.



In addition USD 35.5 million have been allocated to improve Rafael's LITENING airborne targeting pod, which is used by the US and Israeli air forces for precision targeting.



The Israel Aircraft Industry has been allocated USD 26 million to upgrade its Hunter UAV and USD 9.4 million to improve the Pioneer UAV model, a joint venture with a US firm.



USD 137 million have been allocated to develop systems to protect armored vehicles and tanks from anti-tank missiles.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340 … 71,00.html


Now imagine if this arms aid would stop. This will mean that Israel would be forced to make peace with the Arabs. Cause without this aid Israel can't keep it's military and it's economics like it is today.
2006-09-30 03:34:56
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6903|USA

bogo24dk wrote:

(WASHINGTON) The US congress has approved a USD 500 million aid package for the development of joint defense systems with Israel  .


The package was approved as part of the USD 447.6 billion defense budget for 2007, which includes USD 70 billion for the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.


The package comes in addition to USD 2.36 billion in military aid granted to Israel by the US each year.


Israeli officials welcomed the move, which they say underlines US confidence in Israel's defense industry.


The bill was passed by the House of Representatives on Thursday.



The Bush administration initially requests a USD 268 million increase to military aid to Israel, but the congress double that amount citing the importance of US-Israeli military cooperation.



USD 20 million of the package will be allocated to developing an interception system for short and medium range missiles. The system, known as David's Sling, will be developed by the Israel Armament Development Authority, Rafael, and US firm Raytheon.



The project is likely to be completed within six years, but both companies hope US and Israeli authorities will allocate the necessary funds for the deployment of interception batteries within a shorter time span.



In addition USD 35.5 million have been allocated to improve Rafael's LITENING airborne targeting pod, which is used by the US and Israeli air forces for precision targeting.



The Israel Aircraft Industry has been allocated USD 26 million to upgrade its Hunter UAV and USD 9.4 million to improve the Pioneer UAV model, a joint venture with a US firm.



USD 137 million have been allocated to develop systems to protect armored vehicles and tanks from anti-tank missiles.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340 … 71,00.html


Now imagine if this arms aid would stop. This will mean that Israel would be forced to make peace with the Arabs. Cause without this aid Israel can't keep it's military and it's economics like it is today.
By peace, if mean succomb to Arab control or oppression??.....Yeah I guess you would be right.


Or when Israel loses its ability to defend itself, you honestly think peace will naturally envelope the region??
2006-09-30 03:46:07
bogo24dk
Member
+26|6758
Lowing I think you must be one of those who approves of this :

Starving or defeated



Israel should not aim to defeat the Palestinian people

Adi Dagan Published:  09.26.06, 23:26 





Israel's policy in the occupied territories in the past six years, and even more so ever since the Hamas government was elected, has been premised on immense economic and political pressure exerted on Palestinian society.



This pressure is meant, among other things, to cause the Palestinians to accept Israel's preconditions before Israel considers turning its attention to Palestinian needs or interests. This policy of coercion is not only immoral, but also wrong and dangerous to all of us – and every person in Israel must protest it.



Regarding the starvation of Palestinian residents, there is no say much in order to see we're talking about an atrocious policy. Recently we learned that 830,000 residents in Gaza depend on UNRWA's food rations.



Seventy percent of Strip residents are subsisting through donations of flour, oil, beans, and sugar. According to World Bank figures, 2006 is emerging as the most difficult year in the Palestinian Authority's history, as a result of Israel's closure of crossings and prevention of the movement of goods, as well as foreign aid cutbacks.



The bombing of the Gaza power plant in June left its resident with irregular supply of electricity and water. It's hard to grasp how people live under such conditions for months, particularly in Gaza – a small area disconnected from the world and located dozens of kilometers south of Tel Aviv, although for most Israelis it might as well be on another planet.



Regarding the rational of defeating the Palestinian people and government so that they accept Israel's conditions, seemingly this sounds logical. Israel exerts economic and military pressure on the people, whose lives are becoming intolerable, so that residents press their government to change its ways or act to topple the government and replace it with one that is more suitable for Israel's purposes.



However, this policy is a short-term one and blind to its fateful future implications.



Just agreement needed

Many historical examples exist showing the bitter results of capitulation agreements between peoples. The Oslo Agreements between Israel and Arafat, who was a weak leader at the time desperate for diplomatic achievements, dragged the Palestinians into agreeing for symbolic control over roughly 40 percent of the Territories.



This led to the number of settlers being doubled in the period 1994-2000.



The maintenance of control mechanisms in accordance with Israel's interests in the Territories led to the outbreak of the second Intifada. In Lebanon, the 1982 invasion and Israel's lengthy presence and intervention in the country managed to bring about the removal of the PLO, but enabled Hizbullah to emerge.



Similarly, Iraq's occupation and the establishment of a pro-American regime there by force are boosting the resistance offered by some local factions and serve as fertile ground for violence and the absence of stability and peace.



The conclusion of all this is that starving and punishing the Palestinian population is not only an atrocious, blind policy. The attempt to shatter political frameworks and intervene in the basic positions of a foreign government is highly dangerous.



Genuine negotiations that would lead to a just agreement accepted by all sides must be premised on compromise vis-à-vis the genuine desires and interests of the Palestinian people, and not vis-à-vis a platform introduced by a puppet regime and an exhausted, starved people that has been defeated. Such capitulation agreements will ultimately fan the flames of the continuing conflict.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340 … 49,00.html

Some strong resemblance with the methods which the Nazi used in Poland against the Jews.
2006-09-30 03:56:02
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6903|USA
Well it is obvious you refuse to answer my questions posed to you..I don't blame you one bit, because an HONEST answer would pretty much deflate your post.
2006-09-30 03:58:48
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6903|USA
http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Israel_comp … _pull-outs


Yeah, I see peace breaking out everywhere in the region because of Israel pulling out of land acquired during a war the ARABS started.
2006-09-30 04:01:39
bogo24dk
Member
+26|6758

lowing wrote:

Well it is obvious you refuse to answer my questions posed to you..I don't blame you one bit, because an HONEST answer would pretty much deflate your post.
Ok tell me what is the meaning of this racist comment wich you made "mean succomb to Arab control or oppression". And maybe if you went and gave a intelligent answer then you would have received one.

And then you could also answer the question about Gaza.
2006-09-30 04:08:18
bogo24dk
Member
+26|6758

lowing wrote:

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Israel_completes_Gaza_strip,_West_Bank_pull-outs


Yeah, I see peace breaking out everywhere in the region because of Israel pulling out of land acquired during a war the ARABS started.
Did the Egyptians actually start the 1967 war, as Israel originally claimed?

"The former Commander of the Air Force, General Ezer Weizmann, regarded as a hawk, stated that there was ‘no threat of destruction’ but that the attack on Egypt, Jordan and Syria was nevertheless justified so that Israel could ‘exist according to the scale, spirit and equality she now embodies.’…Menachem Begin had the following remarks to make: ‘In June 1967, we again had a choice. The Egyptian Army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.’ "

Moshe Dayan posthumously speaks out on the Golan Heights

"Moshe Dayan, the celebrated commander who, a Defense Minister in 1967, gave the order to conquer the Golan…[said] many of the firefights with the Syrians were deliberately provoked by Israel, and the kibbutz residents who pressed the government to take the Golan Heights did so less for security than for their farmland…[Dayan stated ‘They didn’t even try to hide their greed for their land… WE would send a tractor to plow some area where it wasn’t` possible to do anything, in the demilitarized area, and knew in advance that the Syrians would start to shoot. If they didn’t shoot we would tell the tractor to advance further, until in the end the Syrians would get annoyed and shoot. And then we would use artillery and later the air force also, and that’s how it was…The Syrian’s, on the fourth day of the war, were not a threat to us.’ "

The New York Times, May 11, 1997.


And answer me this :

1. Why have they not pulled out of west bank but instead they have build more settlement's ?
2006-09-30 04:13:05
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6903|USA

bogo24dk wrote:

lowing wrote:

Well it is obvious you refuse to answer my questions posed to you..I don't blame you one bit, because an HONEST answer would pretty much deflate your post.
Ok tell me what is the meaning of this racist comment wich you made "mean succomb to Arab control or oppression". And maybe if you went and gave a intelligent answer then you would have received one.

And then you could also answer the question about Gaza.
There is noy one single racist comment in my posts to you. My question to you is legit. I suggest you don't answer it though because you will have to answer honestly and I don't think you wanna be liar. So keep derailing the question.
2006-09-30 04:19:05
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6903|USA

bogo24dk wrote:

lowing wrote:

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Israel_completes_Gaza_strip,_West_Bank_pull-outs


Yeah, I see peace breaking out everywhere in the region because of Israel pulling out of land acquired during a war the ARABS started.
Did the Egyptians actually start the 1967 war, as Israel originally claimed?

"The former Commander of the Air Force, General Ezer Weizmann, regarded as a hawk, stated that there was ‘no threat of destruction’ but that the attack on Egypt, Jordan and Syria was nevertheless justified so that Israel could ‘exist according to the scale, spirit and equality she now embodies.’…Menachem Begin had the following remarks to make: ‘In June 1967, we again had a choice. The Egyptian Army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.’ "

Moshe Dayan posthumously speaks out on the Golan Heights

"Moshe Dayan, the celebrated commander who, a Defense Minister in 1967, gave the order to conquer the Golan…[said] many of the firefights with the Syrians were deliberately provoked by Israel, and the kibbutz residents who pressed the government to take the Golan Heights did so less for security than for their farmland…[Dayan stated ‘They didn’t even try to hide their greed for their land… WE would send a tractor to plow some area where it wasn’t` possible to do anything, in the demilitarized area, and knew in advance that the Syrians would start to shoot. If they didn’t shoot we would tell the tractor to advance further, until in the end the Syrians would get annoyed and shoot. And then we would use artillery and later the air force also, and that’s how it was…The Syrian’s, on the fourth day of the war, were not a threat to us.’ "

The New York Times, May 11, 1997.


And answer me this :

1. Why have they not pulled out of west bank but instead they have build more settlement's ?
Yeah the Arabs started the war... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War


from what I read, Israel had started a pull out of the west bank.
2006-09-30 04:24:24
bogo24dk
Member
+26|6758

lowing wrote:

bogo24dk wrote:

lowing wrote:

Well it is obvious you refuse to answer my questions posed to you..I don't blame you one bit, because an HONEST answer would pretty much deflate your post.
Ok tell me what is the meaning of this racist comment wich you made "mean succomb to Arab control or oppression". And maybe if you went and gave a intelligent answer then you would have received one.

And then you could also answer the question about Gaza.
There is noy one single racist comment in my posts to you. My question to you is legit. I suggest you don't answer it though because you will have to answer honestly and I don't think you wanna be liar. So keep derailing the question.
Explain me the word "succomb " i am not quite familiar with what it stands for. And as i told you i would answer your question.
2006-09-30 04:30:41
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6903|USA

bogo24dk wrote:

lowing wrote:

bogo24dk wrote:


Ok tell me what is the meaning of this racist comment wich you made "mean succomb to Arab control or oppression". And maybe if you went and gave a intelligent answer then you would have received one.

And then you could also answer the question about Gaza.
There is noy one single racist comment in my posts to you. My question to you is legit. I suggest you don't answer it though because you will have to answer honestly and I don't think you wanna be liar. So keep derailing the question.
Explain me the word "succomb " i am not quite familiar with what it stands for. And as i told you i would answer your question.
succumb ( as per dicionary.com)

1. to give way to superior force; yield: to succumb to despair. 
2. to yield to disease, wounds, old age, etc.; die.
2006-09-30 04:46:01
bogo24dk
Member
+26|6758

lowing wrote:

bogo24dk wrote:

lowing wrote:


There is noy one single racist comment in my posts to you. My question to you is legit. I suggest you don't answer it though because you will have to answer honestly and I don't think you wanna be liar. So keep derailing the question.
Explain me the word "succomb " i am not quite familiar with what it stands for. And as i told you i would answer your question.
succumb ( as per dicionary.com)

1. to give way to superior force; yield: to succumb to despair. 
2. to yield to disease, wounds, old age, etc.; die.
OK point one which you have to take in Consideration Israel has Nuclear capability . Invading Israel would mean being abliterated from the face of the earth . Attacking Israel with nuclear weapons means wiping out the Palestinians in the process and facing a obliteration to.
Point 2 trying to attack Israel means going to war with US to.

Now how the heck can you dismiss this to points.

And while you talk about Middle east Being ruled by Dictators. Why don't you look who is supporting those dictators. Most Arabs want them gone .
But is this you justification for occupation, starving people and settlements.
2006-09-30 04:47:29
bogo24dk
Member
+26|6758

lowing wrote:

bogo24dk wrote:

lowing wrote:

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Israel_completes_Gaza_strip,_West_Bank_pull-outs


Yeah, I see peace breaking out everywhere in the region because of Israel pulling out of land acquired during a war the ARABS started.
Did the Egyptians actually start the 1967 war, as Israel originally claimed?

"The former Commander of the Air Force, General Ezer Weizmann, regarded as a hawk, stated that there was ‘no threat of destruction’ but that the attack on Egypt, Jordan and Syria was nevertheless justified so that Israel could ‘exist according to the scale, spirit and equality she now embodies.’…Menachem Begin had the following remarks to make: ‘In June 1967, we again had a choice. The Egyptian Army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.’ "

Moshe Dayan posthumously speaks out on the Golan Heights

"Moshe Dayan, the celebrated commander who, a Defense Minister in 1967, gave the order to conquer the Golan…[said] many of the firefights with the Syrians were deliberately provoked by Israel, and the kibbutz residents who pressed the government to take the Golan Heights did so less for security than for their farmland…[Dayan stated ‘They didn’t even try to hide their greed for their land… WE would send a tractor to plow some area where it wasn’t` possible to do anything, in the demilitarized area, and knew in advance that the Syrians would start to shoot. If they didn’t shoot we would tell the tractor to advance further, until in the end the Syrians would get annoyed and shoot. And then we would use artillery and later the air force also, and that’s how it was…The Syrian’s, on the fourth day of the war, were not a threat to us.’ "

The New York Times, May 11, 1997.


And answer me this :

1. Why have they not pulled out of west bank but instead they have build more settlement's ?
Yeah the Arabs started the war... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War


from what I read, Israel had started a pull out of the west bank.
So the Defence Minister and the Commander of the Air force is lying? Right ?
2006-09-30 04:50:47
starman7
Member
+15|6976
I believe that US aid is unneccesary for Israel's survival, but certainly welcome.  Israel, with minimal aid, no regular armed forces, and barely any government, defeated the Arabs in their war of independence.  They lost 1% of their population.  Today's aid probably means only that Israel will no longer need to suffer such horrible losses in the Arab-Israeli wars.  Oh, and do you really think that the Arabs want peace?  When practically every significant leader (except for the moderate countries) is shouting, "Death to Israel!" (and America)?  Has Israel really started any wars (except for maybe the two Lebanon war/occupations, both of which were prompted by terrorist activity).

And why is it that when I look at a map of the world's money, Israel is just as big as any of its neighbors, yet when you look at the map of the world's oil, its Arab neighbors have tons of oil, and Israel not a drop?  Seems to me that their economy is going strong, and is not based on any single thing like oil.  With a GDP (with PPP) of over $160 billion, I doubt a loss of $2.8 billion is going to do much.

Oh, and with the farmers wanting land over defense... that could quite possibly be a biased view from a single source, and what farmer doesn't want more land?

Simply put, you do not understand the facts if you believe that the Arab-Israeli wars and hatred are going to just suddenly stop if the US stops aid.  The Arabs have had plenty of chances to back off and let Isreal exist, especially when they had plenty of chances (especially right from the start).  Do you see government-backed religous leaders preaching martyrdom and hatred of Muslims in Israel?

EDIT: As for the nukes, they would only be used if Isreal was under significant threat of total destruction.  That would be racist by the Arabs, no?

And if the Palestinians really want those leaders gone, then why the riots?  Why chant, "Death to Israel"?  Oh, and why do they accept the simple preconditions of:  Renouncing the use of violence, recognizing Isreal's right to exist, and honoring previous diplomatic agreements?  The US would demand at least those basic courtesies before negotiating with anyone.  And Arafat wasn't a weak leader, he was a two-faced liar, a master of double talk (such as saying, "Oh, we want peace" to most of the world and hours later preaching the destruction of Israel to a Muslim crowd).

Last edited by starman7 (2006-09-30 04:57:05)

2006-09-30 04:56:30
sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|7009|Argentina

lowing wrote:

By peace, if mean succomb to Arab control or oppression??.....Yeah I guess you would be right.
Or when Israel loses its ability to defend itself, you honestly think peace will naturally envelope the region??
It means leaving Israel by its own and stopping its reign of terror supported with US funds.  Leave Israel without funds and let's find out.
Do you honestly think that Israel bombing Lebanon or invading Palestine lands will naturally bring peace to the region?
2006-09-30 04:57:48
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6903|USA

bogo24dk wrote:

lowing wrote:

bogo24dk wrote:


Explain me the word "succomb " i am not quite familiar with what it stands for. And as i told you i would answer your question.
succumb ( as per dicionary.com)

1. to give way to superior force; yield: to succumb to despair. 
2. to yield to disease, wounds, old age, etc.; die.
OK point one which you have to take in Consideration Israel has Nuclear capability . Invading Israel would mean being abliterated from the face of the earth . Attacking Israel with nuclear weapons means wiping out the Palestinians in the process and facing a obliteration to.
Point 2 trying to attack Israel means going to war with US to.

Now how the heck can you dismiss this to points.

And while you talk about Middle east Being ruled by Dictators. Why don't you look who is supporting those dictators. Most Arabs want them gone .
But is this you justification for occupation, starving people and settlements.
Ummm according to the Iranian President, wiping Israel off the face of the earth is EXACTLY what he is calling out for.

I would hope so, I think the US should be there if called upon by any of our allies.

There is no justification for starving people and settlements....Israel has taken control of a belief that it has no right to exist. Don't trash Israel because it refuses to let go of the snake that is trying to bite it.

How about this....How about the Arab nations surrounding Israel sign a treaty with Israel promising no attacks or terrorism by them, and also would go after anyone that committed such acts. Let the Arab nations do this and THEN we will see what happens.

Don't expect any relief from Israel as long as the threats and rockets rain down on them from the Arab nations.
2006-09-30 04:58:48
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6903|USA

bogo24dk wrote:

lowing wrote:

bogo24dk wrote:

Did the Egyptians actually start the 1967 war, as Israel originally claimed?

"The former Commander of the Air Force, General Ezer Weizmann, regarded as a hawk, stated that there was ‘no threat of destruction’ but that the attack on Egypt, Jordan and Syria was nevertheless justified so that Israel could ‘exist according to the scale, spirit and equality she now embodies.’…Menachem Begin had the following remarks to make: ‘In June 1967, we again had a choice. The Egyptian Army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.’ "

Moshe Dayan posthumously speaks out on the Golan Heights

"Moshe Dayan, the celebrated commander who, a Defense Minister in 1967, gave the order to conquer the Golan…[said] many of the firefights with the Syrians were deliberately provoked by Israel, and the kibbutz residents who pressed the government to take the Golan Heights did so less for security than for their farmland…[Dayan stated ‘They didn’t even try to hide their greed for their land… WE would send a tractor to plow some area where it wasn’t` possible to do anything, in the demilitarized area, and knew in advance that the Syrians would start to shoot. If they didn’t shoot we would tell the tractor to advance further, until in the end the Syrians would get annoyed and shoot. And then we would use artillery and later the air force also, and that’s how it was…The Syrian’s, on the fourth day of the war, were not a threat to us.’ "

The New York Times, May 11, 1997.


And answer me this :

1. Why have they not pulled out of west bank but instead they have build more settlement's ?
Yeah the Arabs started the war... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War


from what I read, Israel had started a pull out of the west bank.
So the Defence Minister and the Commander of the Air force is lying? Right ?
I dunno, probably not.
2006-09-30 04:59:19
starman7
Member
+15|6976
No, but taking out the radical Islamic leaders and attempting to undo the decades of being brainwashed will start the peace.  Indeed, I hope that when I have grandkids, Israel's grandchildren will freely intermingle with Muslim grandchildren and the whole region will bloom, without threat of war, hatred, and opression.

EDIT: This was directed to Sergeriver.  I only put this in because there were two threads which got in while I typed this.

Last edited by starman7 (2006-09-30 05:00:30)

2006-09-30 05:02:49
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6903|USA

sergeriver wrote:

lowing wrote:

By peace, if mean succomb to Arab control or oppression??.....Yeah I guess you would be right.
Or when Israel loses its ability to defend itself, you honestly think peace will naturally envelope the region??
It means leaving Israel by its own and stopping its reign of terror supported with US funds.  Leave Israel without funds and let's find out.
Do you honestly think that Israel bombing Lebanon or invading Palestine lands will naturally bring peace to the region?
History has all ready shown who the agressors are here serge.

Israel is a speck on the map of the ME surrounded by Arab nations that want it destroyed because they have too much land and no right to exist......Yet you call Israel the threat?? C'mon buddy.
2006-09-30 05:07:13
sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|7009|Argentina

lowing wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

lowing wrote:

By peace, if mean succomb to Arab control or oppression??.....Yeah I guess you would be right.
Or when Israel loses its ability to defend itself, you honestly think peace will naturally envelope the region??
It means leaving Israel by its own and stopping its reign of terror supported with US funds.  Leave Israel without funds and let's find out.
Do you honestly think that Israel bombing Lebanon or invading Palestine lands will naturally bring peace to the region?
History has all ready shown who the agressors are here serge.

Israel is a speck on the map of the ME surrounded by Arab nations that want it destroyed because they have too much land and no right to exist......Yet you call Israel the threat?? C'mon buddy.
They all are a threat and I'm tired of them.  Israel and the Arab countries have to deal with this shit by themselves.  Iran is a threat, Israel is a threat, Syria is a threat.  They are the same shit.  I don't support giving money to any of them until they stop this stupid endless war becuase without money you have no bombs.
2006-09-30 05:18:37
starman7
Member
+15|6976
SergeRiver, I support giving money to Israel because the Arabs are already wading in oil money.  Israel hasn't a drop of it.  And I heard somewhere that aid to Arab countries vastly outweighs Israeli aid.
2006-09-30 05:23:44
bogo24dk
Member
+26|6758

lowing wrote:

bogo24dk wrote:

lowing wrote:


succumb ( as per dicionary.com)

1. to give way to superior force; yield: to succumb to despair. 
2. to yield to disease, wounds, old age, etc.; die.
OK point one which you have to take in Consideration Israel has Nuclear capability . Invading Israel would mean being abliterated from the face of the earth . Attacking Israel with nuclear weapons means wiping out the Palestinians in the process and facing a obliteration to.
Point 2 trying to attack Israel means going to war with US to.

Now how the heck can you dismiss this to points.

And while you talk about Middle east Being ruled by Dictators. Why don't you look who is supporting those dictators. Most Arabs want them gone .
But is this you justification for occupation, starving people and settlements.
Ummm according to the Iranian President, wiping Israel off the face of the earth is EXACTLY what he is calling out for.

I would hope so, I think the US should be there if called upon by any of our allies.

There is no justification for starving people and settlements....Israel has taken control of a belief that it has no right to exist. Don't trash Israel because it refuses to let go of the snake that is trying to bite it.

How about this....How about the Arab nations surrounding Israel sign a treaty with Israel promising no attacks or terrorism by them, and also would go after anyone that committed such acts. Let the Arab nations do this and THEN we will see what happens.

Don't expect any relief from Israel as long as the threats and rockets rain down on them from the Arab nations.
Arabs are more eager to solve this problem then Israel. Over the years the Arabs have called for peace talks.
Land for Peace , and you wouldn't find any one who doesnt agree with that. Unless you are referring to some fanatics which exists on both sides. And they are the minority and the loudest voices.
And with the Iranian president threat are useless. If i had a penny for each time a extremist was threatening somebody. I would been rich right now.
It's funny the Arabs are doing the threatening and Israel is delivering.

I am trashing Israel for the killing and the collective punishment it does. You can't not condemn 1.3 mill people to starvation just because some of them are terrorist. These methods are the ones which are creating the terrorist.
2006-09-30 05:25:08
sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|7009|Argentina

starman7 wrote:

SergeRiver, I support giving money to Israel because the Arabs are already wading in oil money.  Israel hasn't a drop of it.  And I heard somewhere that aid to Arab countries vastly outweighs Israeli aid.
Don't give money to any of them.
2006-09-30 05:28:52
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6903|USA

bogo24dk wrote:

lowing wrote:

bogo24dk wrote:


OK point one which you have to take in Consideration Israel has Nuclear capability . Invading Israel would mean being abliterated from the face of the earth . Attacking Israel with nuclear weapons means wiping out the Palestinians in the process and facing a obliteration to.
Point 2 trying to attack Israel means going to war with US to.

Now how the heck can you dismiss this to points.

And while you talk about Middle east Being ruled by Dictators. Why don't you look who is supporting those dictators. Most Arabs want them gone .
But is this you justification for occupation, starving people and settlements.
Ummm according to the Iranian President, wiping Israel off the face of the earth is EXACTLY what he is calling out for.

I would hope so, I think the US should be there if called upon by any of our allies.

There is no justification for starving people and settlements....Israel has taken control of a belief that it has no right to exist. Don't trash Israel because it refuses to let go of the snake that is trying to bite it.

How about this....How about the Arab nations surrounding Israel sign a treaty with Israel promising no attacks or terrorism by them, and also would go after anyone that committed such acts. Let the Arab nations do this and THEN we will see what happens.

Don't expect any relief from Israel as long as the threats and rockets rain down on them from the Arab nations.
Arabs are more eager to solve this problem then Israel. Over the years the Arabs have called for peace talks.
Land for Peace , and you wouldn't find any one who doesnt agree with that. Unless you are referring to some fanatics which exists on both sides. And they are the minority and the loudest voices.
And with the Iranian president threat are useless. If i had a penny for each time a extremist was threatening somebody. I would been rich right now.
It's funny the Arabs are doing the threatening and Israel is delivering.

I am trashing Israel for the killing and the collective punishment it does. You can't not condemn 1.3 mill people to starvation just because some of them are terrorist. These methods are the ones which are creating the terrorist.
then it is time the Palistinians started policing THEMSELVES.
2006-09-30 05:28:58
AlbertWesker[RE]
Not Human Anymore
+144|6896|Seattle, WA

lowing wrote:

How about this....How about the Arab nations surrounding Israel sign a treaty with Israel promising no attacks or terrorism by them, and also would go after anyone that committed such acts. Let the Arab nations do this and THEN we will see what happens.
BAm QFT exactly right there, discussion OVER

Topic closed

Pages: 1 2 3 4

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard