BF2S Forums Palestine & Israel Discussion Thread

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

you cant fight a conventional war when the enemy uses civilians as part of their strategy

Maybe the answer is for the international community to arm & train Lebanon to the same level the US armed Israel and let them have it out 'conventionally' in open warfare. The Arabian Desert is close by, good big open space for a conventional war, trenches and all.
There is no conventional war anymore. That ended with the bombing of Dresden.

SFPR wrote:

I believe that the Hezballah forces have no right to be hiding among civilians. This is an act of cowardness and Israel has the right to hunt them down. I have been in the military for about 14 years now and I think that Mr. Bush will send us to help the Israeli forces.

Hilarious. Say goodbye to all middle eastern oil then. I guess you forgot about the 70s oil crisis.

Kmarion wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

SFPR wrote:

I believe that the Hezballah forces have no right to be hiding among civilians. This is an act of cowardness and Israel has the right to hunt them down. I have been in the military for about 14 years now and I think that Mr. Bush will send us to help the Israeli forces.

Hilarious. Say goodbye to all middle eastern oil then. I guess you forgot about the 70s oil crisis.

That works both ways. What do you think would happen to those governments with out the US funding their nation via buying oil? Not much going on with other exports.

Didn't bother them in the 70s. The west isn't the sole source of commodities you know - China, Russia, South East Asia, Latin America.

Kmarion wrote:

Understood but it's a BIIIIG chunk. Are you honestly going to debate that removing billions and billions of dollars out of the middle east isn't going to "bother them". I know you are smart enough to not believe that. Perhaps we would be finally forced into finding other alternatives like our Gulf and AK.

It might bother the people of the region, but probably not the governments. They will just sell their oil products more selectively to hold the west to ransom until they get what they want and won't mind going a little spartan on luxury for a while. They have the west over the proverbial barrel, let's face it, and anti-israeliism is the tie that binds all the people of that region. Open US military action with Israel will just set the US back about 10 gazillion years in terms of public opinion in the middle east, not that anyone really respects them much there anyway.

rawls2 wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Understood but it's a BIIIIG chunk. Are you honestly going to debate that removing billions and billions of dollars out of the middle east isn't going to "bother them". I know you are smart enough to not believe that. Perhaps we would be finally forced into finding other alternatives like our Gulf and AK.

It might bother the people of the region, but probably not the governments. They will just sell their oil products more selectively to hold the west to ransom until they get what they want and won't mind going a little spartan on luxury for a while. They have the west over the proverbial barrel, let's face it, and anti-israeliism is the tie that binds all the people of that region. Open US military action with Israel will just set the US back about 10 gazillion years in terms of public opinion in the middle east, not that anyone really respects them much there anyway.

Regarding our dependance on oil: The US would never go thru another oil crisis. If that happened see how fast we could whip up some nuclear reactors and say fuck the ME and there black shit.

It always puzzled me as to why they aren't doing that as we speak. France has the right idea: 80% domestic power from nuclear. I don't understand the US obsession with the middle east. Must be because big oil corporations want to perpetuate the dependence of the people on them.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2006-12-03 12:38:10)

Kmarion wrote:

Open US military action with Israel will just set the US back about 10 gazillion years in terms of public opinion in the middle east, not that anyone really respects them much there anywa

Opinions are of concern but they will not change a person's mind who "feels" they are acting in the best interest. Whether you think it is the right thing to do or not it's what relevant once that person has conviced himself. Your opinion doesn't matter if that person "believes" he is doing what's in the best interest of his family and security. Simply put, the fact you disagree with someone is not enough to make them agree with you.

Most Americans realize if they are going to be successful in maintaining their way of life oil alternatives are mandatory. Not only with regards to the middle east but with the environment as well. Believe it or not there is a great amount of work and money being invested into it. I hate to say it but the amount of money we poured into Iraq could have put us many years ahead into funding the research for this technology.. not to mention rebuilding New Orleans.

But what do I know, I'm just an evil conservative.

I agree with you.

Right on Cam - They should be blasting away right?  Is that what you want?

DesertFox423 wrote:

You'd think they would know by now not to throw stones. Rock < Bullet

You'd think they would've understood by now why it is that they insist on throwing stones.

Fighting for your country with whatever means > being a pussy.

DesertFox423 wrote:

oug wrote:

DesertFox423 wrote:

You'd think they would know by now not to throw stones. Rock < Bullet

You'd think they would've understood by now why it is that they insist on throwing stones.

Fighting for your country with whatever means > being a pussy.

"Hey guys, watch this!"

Possibly causing a bruise to an Israeli soldier (if you hit the person) is fighting for your country?

If you have a gun to spare I'm sure they'd love to use it. But wait, you give all yours to Israel no?

The press is not a magically unbiased organization. Any story, regardless, they want people to be interested in, or con traversal, so as to attract more people. 99% of everything u hear is twisted or changed, not always intentionally, but changed none the less. If some one parked a Katusha rocket truck behind ure house and started shooting rockets at you, maybe killing ure family, would you say "o those poor dears, their misunderstood?" no you would want to do some thing about it. Thats what the Israelites are doing. And now you ll probably use the worst argument of all "its not relavent." The Israelites are in roughly the same position as a security guord with a gun. a terrorist steps onto a platform in the middle of the mall. He opens his coat and is wearing a belt of explosives. Israel has two choices. They can shoot the terrorist, or they can lower the gun.

It's unrealistic to think that countries or nations should be get this and that because they have suffered over something in the past or to think that something "taken" from them should be given back. Likewise it is unrealistic to thinks its "unfair" when a governing body like the U.N. signed over Palestinian land over to the Jews. Not that it would be unusual for those Palestinians to fight for the land they lived in. It seems perfectly legit to me for a defending force to do its job.

I dont want to sound unsympathetic to both the Palestinians and Israel, but war is war. Israel as it is today is not what it is because of a major handout. Yes, they were "given" a piece of land by the U.N. after WWII, but, they had to fight for it and it was no easy task.

I always say that the strong will do what they will and will prevail... for a little while. Not that its to say that the best or those who are good will get the land to themselves. It seems that all land regions underego some form of change culturally and racially, and these changes seem to take hundreds of years.

Palestine as its now called is no exception. If i had to guess I would say that as long as people live in that region, there will be a variation of what religion or culture controls it. Although there has been in the past a mix of all three religions living together in peace at different times in the past; the question at hand is how long will the current power remain in power?

Everyone has their opinion of who or what religion should be in control. And for what, simply for the sake of peace, economics, etc?

CameronPoe wrote:

Anyone any thought on the Baker Commission's recommendation that the Bush administration push for all of the West Bank, Gaza, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights to be evacuated by Israel to placate hostile parties in the region who are impeding peace in Iraq? What about the fact they mentioned right of return!!!? It's like the report was written in backwards land: it was the total opposite to what I thought it would be. Bravo Baker.

It said that?!?!?

Wow!

+1 to Baker!

It will of course be totally dismissed by America as more nonsense from the man who said leaving Saddam in power was the right thing to do, which of course it was.

Last edited by Bertster7 (2006-12-07 16:01:34)

time to read the iraq study group report