Pages: 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 10

 

2008-11-29 20:22:32
LividBovine
The Year of the Cow!
+175|6670|MN
But how does Israel defend itself?  If the Arm y is not allowed to intervene, then what do they do now.  Recruit some terrrorist to repsond in kind?

I don't think Israel should be as forceful in their response as they are, but I do think there should be a response.
"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation" - Barack Obama (a freshman senator from Illinios)
2008-11-29 20:24:28
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6942|USA

LividBovine wrote:

But how does Israel defend itself?  If the Arm y is not allowed to intervene, then what do they do now.  Recruit some terrrorist to repsond in kind?

I don't think Israel should be as forceful in their response as they are, but I do think there should be a response.
Nope, I refuse to condemn the victim for killing an attacker that just wanted to mug them
2008-11-29 20:30:31
LividBovine
The Year of the Cow!
+175|6670|MN
But Lowing, you have to admit that the overhanded response will only make things worse.  I am not a fan of letting someone get away with something, but in the big picture, long run aspect it just doesn't make sense.  They have to find a way of isolating out the bad guys and dealing with them directly.  Try to work with the proper channels and see where it goes.  I know they have a bit in the past, but they need to keep trying, of for nothing else to build up sympathy and support from the rest of the world.

Edit:  And I never said condem them.

Last edited by LividBovine (2008-11-29 20:31:10)

"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation" - Barack Obama (a freshman senator from Illinios)
2008-11-29 20:38:12
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|7052

oh come on.  if they send in troops to hunt them down, then they are invading or whatever.  people cry about this shit too much.
2008-11-29 20:40:33
LividBovine
The Year of the Cow!
+175|6670|MN
I don't know what the right answer is, but can you konestly say that what they are doing is working?
"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation" - Barack Obama (a freshman senator from Illinios)
2008-11-29 20:41:57
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|7052

LividBovine wrote:

but can you konestly say that what they are doing is working?
nothing will work there.  thats the way it is.
2008-11-29 20:46:56
LividBovine
The Year of the Cow!
+175|6670|MN
Allright time to drop some Mark V's then I guess.
"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation" - Barack Obama (a freshman senator from Illinios)
2008-11-29 23:44:36
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,817|6396|eXtreme to the maX

Lowing wrote:

Nope, this is the same thing as telling me that if I shot an intruder I am to blame for the violence.
So you're on the side of the Palestinians?
Fuck Israel
2008-11-29 23:44:45
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6942|USA

LividBovine wrote:

But Lowing, you have to admit that the overhanded response will only make things worse.  I am not a fan of letting someone get away with something, but in the big picture, long run aspect it just doesn't make sense.  They have to find a way of isolating out the bad guys and dealing with them directly.  Try to work with the proper channels and see where it goes.  I know they have a bit in the past, but they need to keep trying, of for nothing else to build up sympathy and support from the rest of the world.

Edit:  And I never said condem them.
Nope what makes things worse is when these terrorist groups get thumped hard, all they do is come back for more. Put the blame where it goes. If Israel was left alone we all know this shit would stop. Ask Egypt or Jordan maybe. Israel was poised to kick the shit outta both of them, now there is supposed peace between them. and probably a good thing for Egypt and Jordan
2008-11-29 23:46:59
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6942|USA

Dilbert_X wrote:

Lowing wrote:

Nope, this is the same thing as telling me that if I shot an intruder I am to blame for the violence.
So you're on the side of the Palestinians?
Nope, it isn't Israel that has started this shit. Israel is just another excuse to hate Jews and persecute them. If it were not Israel it would be something else.
2008-11-30 00:59:04
LividBovine
The Year of the Cow!
+175|6670|MN

lowing wrote:

LividBovine wrote:

But Lowing, you have to admit that the overhanded response will only make things worse.  I am not a fan of letting someone get away with something, but in the big picture, long run aspect it just doesn't make sense.  They have to find a way of isolating out the bad guys and dealing with them directly.  Try to work with the proper channels and see where it goes.  I know they have a bit in the past, but they need to keep trying, of for nothing else to build up sympathy and support from the rest of the world.

Edit:  And I never said condem them.
Nope what makes things worse is when these terrorist groups get thumped hard, all they do is come back for more. Put the blame where it goes. If Israel was left alone we all know this shit would stop. Ask Egypt or Jordan maybe. Israel was poised to kick the shit outta both of them, now there is supposed peace between them. and probably a good thing for Egypt and Jordan
The Palestinian government will not outright say they support the attacks, but they will let them happen while showing token effort towards finding them, so it is very hard to crack down on the government.  The terrorists welcome the Israeli's attacks so they can build more support for their cause.  There is no easy way.  They have to try to do things diplomatically for bit.  They will just keep making more enemies by being so heavy handed in their responses.

I don't think an imminent threat of attack from Israel will have the same effect on Palestine as it did on Egypt or Jordan.
"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation" - Barack Obama (a freshman senator from Illinios)
2008-11-30 01:08:47
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,817|6396|eXtreme to the maX

Lowing wrote:

Nope, it isn't Israel that has started this shit.
In the same way the Nazis didn't start WW2, we just persecuted them because we are all biased anti-aryans?

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2008-11-30 01:10:53)

Fuck Israel
2008-11-30 01:15:09
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6942|USA

Dilbert_X wrote:

Lowing wrote:

Nope, it isn't Israel that has started this shit.
In the same way the Nazis didn't start WW2, we just persecuted them because we are all biased anti-aryans?
back up a bit, look it up. The Nazis were appeased by Europe out the ass in hopes of maintaining a peace, they appeased Germany so much that they finally lost control and Hitler took over.

So much for diplomacy
2008-11-30 01:16:31
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6942|USA

LividBovine wrote:

lowing wrote:

LividBovine wrote:

But Lowing, you have to admit that the overhanded response will only make things worse.  I am not a fan of letting someone get away with something, but in the big picture, long run aspect it just doesn't make sense.  They have to find a way of isolating out the bad guys and dealing with them directly.  Try to work with the proper channels and see where it goes.  I know they have a bit in the past, but they need to keep trying, of for nothing else to build up sympathy and support from the rest of the world.

Edit:  And I never said condem them.
Nope what makes things worse is when these terrorist groups get thumped hard, all they do is come back for more. Put the blame where it goes. If Israel was left alone we all know this shit would stop. Ask Egypt or Jordan maybe. Israel was poised to kick the shit outta both of them, now there is supposed peace between them. and probably a good thing for Egypt and Jordan
The Palestinian government will not outright say they support the attacks, but they will let them happen while showing token effort towards finding them, so it is very hard to crack down on the government.  The terrorists welcome the Israeli's attacks so they can build more support for their cause.  There is no easy way.  They have to try to do things diplomatically for bit.  They will just keep making more enemies by being so heavy handed in their responses.

I don't think an imminent threat of attack from Israel will have the same effect on Palestine as it did on Egypt or Jordan.
What do ya mean, the Palistinian govt ARE terrorists. Or did Hamas somehow shake that image of themselves.
2008-11-30 01:18:16
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6942|USA

LividBovine wrote:

I don't know what the right answer is, but can you konestly say that what they are doing is working?
I do not know what the answer is either, but maybe, just maybe, stop lobbing rockets into Israel might be a good place to start.

Last edited by lowing (2008-11-30 01:19:14)

2008-11-30 01:27:01
AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6443|what

lowing wrote:

back up a bit, look it up. The Nazis were appeased by Europe out the ass in hopes of maintaining a peace, they appeased Germany so much that they finally lost control and Hitler took over.

So much for diplomacy
The rest of Europe "appeasing" Germany aren't to blame that Hitler came to power lowing. That's an outrageous statement.

The opposite is in fact true. Germany was stripped of so much power, militarily and economically after WWI that the resentment felt in the country led to them electing Hitler. They lost a lot of land after WWI which was handed over to the French and that caused a huge amount of animosity.

See the 14 point plan and what actually went into the Treaty of Versailles.
https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png
2008-11-30 01:39:59
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6942|USA

TheAussieReaper wrote:

lowing wrote:

back up a bit, look it up. The Nazis were appeased by Europe out the ass in hopes of maintaining a peace, they appeased Germany so much that they finally lost control and Hitler took over.

So much for diplomacy
The rest of Europe "appeasing" Germany aren't to blame that Hitler came to power lowing. That's an outrageous statement.

The opposite is in fact true. Germany was stripped of so much power, militarily and economically after WWI that the resentment felt in the country led to them electing Hitler. They lost a lot of land after WWI which was handed over to the French and that caused a huge amount of animosity.

See the 14 point plan and what actually went into the Treaty of Versailles.
Didn't say appeasing was the reason Hitlaer came to power, I said Europe tried t oappease Hitler AFTER he came to power and to that "so much for diplomacy"

I am well aware of the humiliation Germany suffered with the Treaty of Versailles. Hilter ceased the opportunity and used this as a means to come to power. This has nothing to do with what I posted.
2008-11-30 01:44:29
PureFodder
Member
+225|6576

lowing wrote:

PureFodder wrote:

lowing wrote:

I see so what you are saying is Israel is the worse offender of violations, period, the fact that those resolutions against them are unfair and biased does not come into play or matter huh?
No I'm saying they disproportionately too many resolutions against them, but when they violate resolutions, they get disproportionately light (if any) consequences for violating them.

Can you think of any country with even remotely as many violated UN resolutions that has avoided any serious repercussions? Why aren't there trade sanctions against Israel?

If Israel were treated as any other country there would be far fewer resolutions against them, but the fewer resolutions against them would result in far more serious international consequences.
Israel gets violated they way they do for no other reason than because it is Israel and hated. That link shows just how biased the UN is against Israel. You expect them to play the game with a biased referee then observe nothing, other than the fact that they never win a game.
There are lots of resolutions against Israel because unlike any other country, when they violated the first few the UN just made more resolutions as opposed to actually doing something about what Israel was doing.

How many other countries can slowly annex large amounts of another country despite multiple UN resolutions against the actions and not be on the end of severe economic sanctions?

Any argument about the UN treating Israel differently cannot be done without accepting the fact that Israel is unique in BOTH the number of resolutions AND the lack of penalty for violating resolutions.
2008-11-30 01:44:42
AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6443|what

lowing wrote:

Didn't say appeasing was the reason Hitlaer came to power, I said Europe tried t oappease Hitler AFTER he came to power and to that "so much for diplomacy"

I am well aware of the humiliation Germany suffered with the Treaty of Versailles. Hilter ceased the opportunity and used this as a means to come to power. This has nothing to do with what I posted.
Sorry I took:

lowing wrote:

they appeased Germany so much that they finally lost control and Hitler took over.
the wrong way. I thought you meant they appeased Germany before Hitler took over Germany. You meant they appeased Hitler before he took over Europe.
https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png
2008-11-30 01:46:13
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6942|USA

TheAussieReaper wrote:

lowing wrote:

Didn't say appeasing was the reason Hitlaer came to power, I said Europe tried t oappease Hitler AFTER he came to power and to that "so much for diplomacy"

I am well aware of the humiliation Germany suffered with the Treaty of Versailles. Hilter ceased the opportunity and used this as a means to come to power. This has nothing to do with what I posted.
Sorry I took:

lowing wrote:

they appeased Germany so much that they finally lost control and Hitler took over.
the wrong way. I thought you meant they appeased Germany before Hitler took over Germany. You meant they appeased Hitler before he took over Europe.
yes sorry if I wasn't clear enough, after re-reading it I can see where ya thought that.
2008-11-30 01:51:03
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6942|USA

PureFodder wrote:

lowing wrote:

PureFodder wrote:


No I'm saying they disproportionately too many resolutions against them, but when they violate resolutions, they get disproportionately light (if any) consequences for violating them.

Can you think of any country with even remotely as many violated UN resolutions that has avoided any serious repercussions? Why aren't there trade sanctions against Israel?

If Israel were treated as any other country there would be far fewer resolutions against them, but the fewer resolutions against them would result in far more serious international consequences.
Israel gets violated they way they do for no other reason than because it is Israel and hated. That link shows just how biased the UN is against Israel. You expect them to play the game with a biased referee then observe nothing, other than the fact that they never win a game.
There are lots of resolutions against Israel because unlike any other country, when they violated the first few the UN just made more resolutions as opposed to actually doing something about what Israel was doing.

How many other countries can slowly annex large amounts of another country despite multiple UN resolutions against the actions and not be on the end of severe economic sanctions?

Any argument about the UN treating Israel differently cannot be done without accepting the fact that Israel is unique in BOTH the number of resolutions AND the lack of penalty for violating resolutions.
A bullshit biased resolution should not be honored by Israel. Israel is not "annexing" shit other than the areas that it is constantly being attacked from. I do not blame them. If Mexico continuously launched attacks from across the border, I am pretty sure the US would take it from them as well. Just like any other country does. Apparently it is absurd if Israel does it. Hence the bias.
2008-11-30 02:02:12
PureFodder
Member
+225|6576

lowing wrote:

PureFodder wrote:

lowing wrote:

Israel gets violated they way they do for no other reason than because it is Israel and hated. That link shows just how biased the UN is against Israel. You expect them to play the game with a biased referee then observe nothing, other than the fact that they never win a game.
There are lots of resolutions against Israel because unlike any other country, when they violated the first few the UN just made more resolutions as opposed to actually doing something about what Israel was doing.

How many other countries can slowly annex large amounts of another country despite multiple UN resolutions against the actions and not be on the end of severe economic sanctions?

Any argument about the UN treating Israel differently cannot be done without accepting the fact that Israel is unique in BOTH the number of resolutions AND the lack of penalty for violating resolutions.
A bullshit biased resolution should not be honored by Israel. Israel is not "annexing" shit other than the areas that it is constantly being attacked from. I do not blame them. If Mexico continuously launched attacks from across the border, I am pretty sure the US would take it from them as well. Just like any other country does. Apparently it is absurd if Israel does it. Hence the bias.
If Mexico repeatedly annexed parts of the US and the international community refused to do anything about it, you'd probable respond violently.
There is no even remote relationship between the regions that Israel annex and the places that rockets are being fired from.
http://www.poptel.org.uk/scgn/archive/a … page2b.htm
http://christianparty.net/israelunresolutions.htm
2008-11-30 02:18:56
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6942|USA

PureFodder wrote:

lowing wrote:

PureFodder wrote:


There are lots of resolutions against Israel because unlike any other country, when they violated the first few the UN just made more resolutions as opposed to actually doing something about what Israel was doing.

How many other countries can slowly annex large amounts of another country despite multiple UN resolutions against the actions and not be on the end of severe economic sanctions?

Any argument about the UN treating Israel differently cannot be done without accepting the fact that Israel is unique in BOTH the number of resolutions AND the lack of penalty for violating resolutions.
A bullshit biased resolution should not be honored by Israel. Israel is not "annexing" shit other than the areas that it is constantly being attacked from. I do not blame them. If Mexico continuously launched attacks from across the border, I am pretty sure the US would take it from them as well. Just like any other country does. Apparently it is absurd if Israel does it. Hence the bias.
If Mexico repeatedly annexed parts of the US and the international community refused to do anything about it, you'd probable respond violently.
There is no even remote relationship between the regions that Israel annex and the places that rockets are being fired from.
http://www.poptel.org.uk/scgn/archive/a … page2b.htm
http://christianparty.net/israelunresolutions.htm
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jso … mf6.html#g


yeah and here is their side. the problem is this. I lend more credibility to those that do not usw women and children as shields or strap bombs to children to blow up in a crowed market. How 'bout you?

As far the mexico thing goes. IF Mexico  and the US were fighting over territory and the UN only passed resolution after resolution against the US. You would be sitting here saying how the US doesn't adhere to UN resolutions.  The fact is, those resolutions you are citing are biased and unfair against Israel. Regardless of the issue.
2008-11-30 02:50:12
PureFodder
Member
+225|6576

lowing wrote:

PureFodder wrote:

lowing wrote:

A bullshit biased resolution should not be honored by Israel. Israel is not "annexing" shit other than the areas that it is constantly being attacked from. I do not blame them. If Mexico continuously launched attacks from across the border, I am pretty sure the US would take it from them as well. Just like any other country does. Apparently it is absurd if Israel does it. Hence the bias.
If Mexico repeatedly annexed parts of the US and the international community refused to do anything about it, you'd probable respond violently.
There is no even remote relationship between the regions that Israel annex and the places that rockets are being fired from.
http://www.poptel.org.uk/scgn/archive/a … page2b.htm
http://christianparty.net/israelunresolutions.htm
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jso … mf6.html#g


yeah and here is their side. the problem is this. I lend more credibility to those that do not usw women and children as shields or strap bombs to children to blow up in a crowed market. How 'bout you?

As far the mexico thing goes. IF Mexico  and the US were fighting over territory and the UN only passed resolution after resolution against the US. You would be sitting here saying how the US doesn't adhere to UN resolutions.  The fact is, those resolutions you are citing are biased and unfair against Israel. Regardless of the issue.
Israel have used women and children as human shields repeatedly.
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&am … &meta=
Your claim that the resolutions are biased ans unfair is due to the number of them, but the number of them is due in part to the lack of repercussions faced when they violate them.

If Israel were not treated with a bias by the UN they would be under severe economic sanctions, if not an invasion by now.
2008-11-30 08:36:50
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6942|USA

PureFodder wrote:

lowing wrote:

PureFodder wrote:


If Mexico repeatedly annexed parts of the US and the international community refused to do anything about it, you'd probable respond violently.
There is no even remote relationship between the regions that Israel annex and the places that rockets are being fired from.
http://www.poptel.org.uk/scgn/archive/a … page2b.htm
http://christianparty.net/israelunresolutions.htm
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jso … mf6.html#g


yeah and here is their side. the problem is this. I lend more credibility to those that do not usw women and children as shields or strap bombs to children to blow up in a crowed market. How 'bout you?

As far the mexico thing goes. IF Mexico  and the US were fighting over territory and the UN only passed resolution after resolution against the US. You would be sitting here saying how the US doesn't adhere to UN resolutions.  The fact is, those resolutions you are citing are biased and unfair against Israel. Regardless of the issue.
Israel have used women and children as human shields repeatedly.
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&am … &meta=
Your claim that the resolutions are biased ans unfair is due to the number of them, but the number of them is due in part to the lack of repercussions faced when they violate them.

If Israel were not treated with a bias by the UN they would be under severe economic sanctions, if not an invasion by now.
No, I never said they were biased and unfair due to the number of them. I said they were biased and unfair period. Israel should not have to comply with resolutions that are clearly biased against them and in no way is a fair resolution of the issue at hand.

 

Pages: 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 10

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard