BF2S Forums Anybody like to comment on these quotes?

CameronPoe wrote:

Well the rub is, say, if Israel decided they wanted to pre-emptively invade another country, the stated aim being to ensure their security (similar-ish to the current Lebanon conflict) - a pre-endorsement for that is something I personally would not be happy about if I were a US citizen. It also emboldens Israel to see how far they can stretch the loyalty of the US.

I believe you will see a change in policy if we ever get beyond everyone killing each other...whenever that is.  The average American doesn't LOVE Israel.  If they have to choose a side, however...

CameronPoe wrote:

........or you could tell Israel to sign the NPT and decommission its nukes AND prevent Iran from acquiring them.

The arguments for Israel keeping nukes is as a deterrent.  In actuality, it's not working.  It makes no sense, but it's probably some sort of back channel agreement we'll never know.  I'm not comfortable with Israel having nukes either, only because it's a matter of time until the extremists really do something terrible...

CameronPoe wrote:

Are you being smug or did you actually not get the analogous nature of my post?

It's another way of saying he didn't actually verbalize what you think he said.

CameronPoe wrote:

Well if Israel had released the 1000 or so kidnapped Lebanese prisoners of the previous invasion of Lebanon in exchange for the kidnapped Israeli soldiers of this conflict - none of this would be happening. Hezbollah did set out negotiation terms - so on this particular issue they could be reasoned with. I'm guessing it's too late for that now though.

We will agree to disagree on this one.  Diplomacy failed on both sides - the Hamas' demands were not equitable, nor was the Israeli detainment policy.

CameronPoe wrote:

Some people have trouble putting 2 & 2 together. I'm spelling it out for the ignorant ones.

Oh, I'll stop then.  The thing about posting news sources, some of which are opinions, is that opinions are not always facts.  I made my point in the first post I left - US & Israelis are allied.  My opinion - that sucks, it was convenient for us so far, it's probably going to be less convenient in the future.

Have a good weekend Cam...don't blow anyone up.
-Pug

OMG I love Baghdad Bob.

The Collected Quotations of "Baghdad Bob," Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf: The Iraqi Minister of DisInformation
Mocking the Coalition's Attempt To Target Saddam Hussein:
"These villains, and in particular the villain Bush, said they had struck Iraq with 40 cruise missiles to assassinate President Saddam Hussein.  Not only are they disappointed, I think they are hysterical."

Attempting to Acknowledge What Was Happening Militarily Beyond Baghdad:
March 22, 2003
"Maybe they will enter Umm Qasr and Basra, but how will they enter Baghdad?  It will be a big oven for them. They can penetrate our borders but they cannot reach Baghdad.  They will try to pull our army and troops out but we are well aware of their plans and they will fail."

March 23, 2003
"In Umm Qasr, the fighting is fierce and we have inflicted many damages.  The stupid enemy, the Americans and British, failed completely.  They're not making any penetration."

As Televised Reports of U.S. Forces Approaching the Outskirts of Western Baghdad Are Shown:
"They are not any place.  They are on the move everywhere.  They are a snake moving in the desert.  They hold no place in Iraq.  This is an illusion."

After U.S. Forces Seized Baghdad's Airport:
"We butchered the force present at the airport.  We have retaken the airport!  There are no Americans there!"

After U.S. Troops Penetrated Central Baghdad:
April 5, 2003
"Nobody came here. Those America losers, I think their repeated frequent lies are bringing them down very rapidly....  Baghdad is secure, is safe."

April 5, 2003
"They are not near Baghdad. Don't believe them....  They said they entered with...  tanks in the middle of the capital.  They claim that they - I tell you, I... that this speech is too far from the reality. It is a part of this sickness of their plan. There is no an... - no any existence to the American troops or for the troops in Baghdad at all."

April 6, 2003
"Whenever we attack, they retreat.  When we pound them with missiles and heavy artillery, they retreat even deeper.  But when we stopped pounding, they pushed to the airport for propaganda purposes."

April 7, 2003
"The Americans are not there.  They're not in Baghdad.  There are no troops there.  Never.  They're not at all."

April 7, 2003
"U.S. forces learned a lesson last night they will never forget.  We slaughtered them and will continue to slaughter them."

April 7, 2003
"There is no presence of American infidels in the city of Baghdad."

With Media Pictures of U.S. Troops Being Shown Standing Under the Giant Crossed Swords in Saddam's Favorite Parade Grounds in Baghdad, While Giving a Press Briefing Around the Corner:
"There you can see, there is nothing going on."

After U.S. Missiles Destroyed His Office in the Information Ministry and He was Forced to Give Press Briefings on the Street:
"They will be burnt.  We are going to tackle them."

Disputing His Own Assertions of No Coalition Troops in Baghdad:
"We blocked them inside the city.  Their rear is blocked....  They pushed a few of their armored carriers and some tanks with their soldiers.  We besieged them and I think we will finish them soon."

While American Soldiers Are Showering in Saddam's Bathroom Nearby Presidential Palace:
"We have killed most of the [coalition] infidels, and I think we will finish off the rest soon."

After Being Shown Footage of Iraqi Soldiers Surrendering:
"Those are not Iraqi soldiers at all."

April 7, 2003
"This invasion will end in failure."

April 8, 2003
"Baghdad Bob" disappeared, perhaps forever.  On the other hand, perhaps he will return as Minister of Information for France or be awarded a drive time show on the new liberal talk radio network.

More good stuff here http://www.internetweekly.org/iwr/carto … ter_2.html

Last edited by King_County_Downy (2006-08-11 15:28:21)

Jusster wrote:

you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

You can say that again!! Better yet I'll say it for you

Sorry for all the idioms...........I'm from Texas so I can't help it 


Jusster

Jusster wrote:

And you call this an ally?  Someone looking out for our interest in the region?

I can't believe that any American can just let that go over their head as no big deal.  But I guess thats also why you can't seem to realize that Israel is the root of your problems in the middle east.

Again, great job putting it together for them but you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.



Jusster

Stating this in a speech five years ago has different implications if it was said today.  The fact is that Israel does not run America.  So it only goes as far to say that the Israelis have a warped sense of reality.  The implications that Israel controls our government is absolutely ridiculous.  Obviously it is upsetting to have any foreigner claiming to have complete control over the US, but is not a true statement.  Is this good teamwork?  No...

Can we do anything about it?  Sure.  Does it make more sense to blow it off because Israel was useful five years ago?  Yes.  Will it always be like this?  No.

Pretty cut and dry to me - a matter of convenience.  Hypothetical - the Israeli PM says this today.  What's US' response?  I think there would at least be a decent chance of "have fun with your little block party...later".

CameronPoe wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

OK. You pick who we support.... 

A Democracy with a government set up like ours.

or

Relegious Fanatics who want your people dead, burn your flag and dance in the street every time something bad happens to your people?


Tough choice for me..................

A democracy with a government set up like ours. Great reason to support a country. LOL. Not a care in the world if actions they take are immoral. It's reasoning like that which led to USA supporting regimes like that of Saddam Hussein, King Fahd of Saudi Arabia, Manuel Noriega, Fulgencio Batista and numerous other despots.

Reason the 'religious fanatics ... want your people dead'? Unconditional, unswerving support for zionism.

1.  Actually it is a great reason to support another country.  Countries with similar governments battle countries w/ other governments.  USA/England VS. Japan/Germany (democracies vs. dictators), FACT.

2.  Israel's actions are immoral?  What the hell are your standards as to what is and isn't moral?  Is it moral to strap a bomb to yourself and kill people on their way to school and work?

3.  Thank you for proving my point.  OK.  We supported Saddam H and some others (Noreaga).  Different type of government... Our bad.  Look how it turned out.  They went psycho.. IT IS OUR MORAL OBLIGATION TO REMOVE THEM.

4. Why do they really want us dead?  We aren't a their type of muslim.  The US last time I checked the USA was founded by the Puritans, a JudoChristian relegion.  How long have the Christians and Muslims been fighting? Hundreds if not thousands of years.  Muslim extremists will not rest until all Christians and Jews are wiped off the face of the Earth.  Why don't you read some of the rantings of the Iranian leader?  That's how they think..  Has Bush ever stated anything like that?  I wonder who the aggressors are.  Isn't this latest thing over what the Hezebolholes did (kidnap an Israeli soldier)?  They (Hezholes) brought this on themselves.  Damn, its hard explaining this stuff to you guys.

Last edited by DBBrinson1 (2006-08-11 22:29:03)

Pug.........Id have to politely disagree

Pug wrote:

The fact is that Israel does not run America.  So it only goes as far to say that the Israelis have a warped sense of reality.  The implications that Israel controls our government is absolutely ridiculous.  Obviously it is upsetting to have any foreigner claiming to have complete control over the US, but is not a true statement.  Is this good teamwork?  No...

I don't believe that Israel runs America..........and I would definitely agree that they do have a warped sense of reality.  My issue is that we support them no matter what they say or do to the degree that its starting to make us look like fools.  This is not just some foreigner saying this, this is the former Prime Minster (not even what, 7 or 8 months ago) saying this to his own people.  If this is not a true indication of the way they feel about us.........what else is.  What is Tony Blair let crap like that come out his mouth.........would you still support him?

But yet we pump over 10 billion dollars a year into that country and prise them like its no tomorrow.  How embarrassing is that?  As far as I'm concerned, it is the direct hatred towards Israel that causes hatred towards us in the middle east. 

That said, if we stop supporting a country that morality speaking, is no better off then the rest of them in the region, and not show bias in disputes, then maybe the world will see our decision making process as just again.

And I'm still waiting for one of you kind fellas to explain to me how in 1967 our ship, the USS Liberty was attacked?  And we still support these people.............you've got to be kidding me?  We were already fighting a major conflict in Vietnam and this is what we allow our allies to do to us?

Pug wrote:

Pretty cut and dry to me - a matter of convenience.  Hypothetical - the Israeli PM says this today.  What's US' response?  I think there would at least be a decent chance of "have fun with your little block party...later".

This should have been our response 5 years ago, Now, and sure as hell in 1967

[edit]I think this post should answer that question for ya DBBrinson1.  I hope you'll be the one to answer my USS Libery question please[/edit]



Jusster

Last edited by Jusster (2006-08-11 22:55:49)

Jusster wrote:

And I'm still waiting for one of you kind fellas to explain to me how in 1967 our ship, the USS Liberty was attacked?  And we still support these people.............you've got to be kidding me?  We were already fighting a major conflict in Vietnam and this is what we allow our allies to do to us?

Wow, didn't know about that one. I'd love to hear what the 'Israel is awesome' croud has to say about this.

I'm looking forward to one of the following responses.

1. It was an accident, shit happens!
2. That never happened
3. It's Hezbollahs fault
4. It's Canadas fault
5. Polar Bears

Jusster wrote:

Pug.........Id have to politely disagree

Pug wrote:

The fact is that Israel does not run America.  So it only goes as far to say that the Israelis have a warped sense of reality.  The implications that Israel controls our government is absolutely ridiculous.  Obviously it is upsetting to have any foreigner claiming to have complete control over the US, but is not a true statement.  Is this good teamwork?  No...

I don't believe that Israel runs America..........and I would definitely agree that they do have a warped sense of reality.  My issue is that we support them no matter what they say or do to the degree that its starting to make us look like fools.  This is not just some foreigner saying this, this is the former Prime Minster (not even what, 7 or 8 months ago) saying this to his own people.  If this is not a true indication of the way they feel about us.........what else is.  What is Tony Blair let crap like that come out his mouth.........would you still support him?

But yet we pump over 10 billion dollars a year into that country and prise them like its no tomorrow.  How embarrassing is that?  As far as I'm concerned, it is the direct hatred towards Israel that causes hatred towards us in the middle east. 

That said, if we stop supporting a country that morality speaking, is no better off then the rest of them in the region, and not show bias in disputes, then maybe the world will see our decision making process as just again.

And I'm still waiting for one of you kind fellas to explain to me how in 1967 our ship, the USS Liberty was attacked?  And we still support these people.............you've got to be kidding me?  We were already fighting a major conflict in Vietnam and this is what we allow our allies to do to us?

Pug wrote:

Pretty cut and dry to me - a matter of convenience.  Hypothetical - the Israeli PM says this today.  What's US' response?  I think there would at least be a decent chance of "have fun with your little block party...later".

This should have been our response 5 years ago, Now, and sure as hell in 1967

[edit]I think this post should answer that question for ya DBBrinson1.  I hope you'll be the one to answer my USS Libery question please[/edit]



Jusster

Well, then we agree.  My argument is on of perspective - besides Jordan, the only solid US ally in the Middle East is Israel.  Until there is a change Israel gets backed because it has the best cards...unfortunately.  I haven't ever run into another American shouting "Gee, Israel is awesome.  I love Israel."  The fact is we HAVE to support them because its the only toehold we have in the Middle East.  It's like being unemployed and working below minimum wage - at least you get paid sometime.

As far as the USS Liberty goes - I wrote a paper on it in college.  It was an "accident".  Although never proved, there is a theory that the spy ship got hit because it was spying on Israel.  It probably was meant as a message to the US.  This is no different than the U2 incident - a message not to spy on the home state.

The difference here is that Israel paid reparations.  I do, however, believe the only way to diffuse the situation is to go overboard with reparations to the arabs.

Sorry, I do not think Liberty is relevant because the US showed the aggression by spying on Israel.

So to sum up - 1) Israel is an ally, 2) Boy that sucks.

CameronPoe wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

1.  Actually it is a great reason to support another country.  Countries with similar governments battle countries w/ other governments.  USA/England VS. Japan/Germany (democracies vs. dictators), FACT.

Countries with similar governments do not go to war on the same side because they have similar government. I don't think we'll be seeing a US-Venezuela-Bolivia coalition any time soon. They go to war on the same side because they have a shared objective. Israel's objective seems to be to eradicate or drive away all Palestinians from the 'greater land of Israel' - I'd have problems feeling comfortable with my government supporting that and other war crimes.

DBBrinson1 wrote:

2.  Israel's actions are immoral?  What the hell are your standards as to what is and isn't moral?  Is it moral to strap a bomb to yourself and kill people on their way to school and work?

Pick any of the many threads where I go into great detail on the immorality of the state of Israel. Watch this video if you wish to educate yourself even:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid … 4384920696
Is it moral to strap on a bomb, etc. etc.? No. Is it moral to have created a state out of the suffering and displacement of others? No.

DBBrinson1 wrote:

3.  Thank you for proving my point.  OK.  We supported Saddam H and some others (Noreaga).  Different type of government... Our bad.  Look how it turned out.  They went psycho.. IT IS OUR MORAL OBLIGATION TO REMOVE THEM.

Your moral obligation is to make sure you never needlessly fuck around in other countries again. Thousands of lives expended for what? Absolutely fucking nothing.

DBBrinson1 wrote:

4. Why do they really want us dead?  We aren't a their type of muslim.  The US last time I checked the USA was founded by the Puritans, a JudoChristian relegion.  How long have the Christians and Muslims been fighting? Hundreds if not thousands of years.  Muslim extremists will not rest until all Christians and Jews are wiped off the face of the Earth.  Why don't you read some of the rantings of the Iranian leader?  That's how they think..  Has Bush ever stated anything like that?  I wonder who the aggressors are.  Isn't this latest thing over what the Hezebolholes did (kidnap an Israeli soldier)?  They (Hezholes) brought this on themselves.  Damn, its hard explaining this stuff to you guys.

I'm well aware of what some muslim extremist groups goals are. I'm sure everybody is crystal clear on Mahmouhd Ahmedinijad's stated aims. As a former Christian I find the term 'judeochristian' offensive. If you're coing to use that term please also refer to islam as judeochristoislam. All three religions worship the same god and stem from the same religion. You seem quite content to ignore the motto 'two wrongs don't make a right'. You seem to be oblivious to the fact that the Israelis occupation of Lebanon did not end in 2000. Israel also hold more than 1000 kidnapped Lebanese soldiers from the previous full scale invasion of Lebanon. That to me is reason to kidnap some Israel soldiers. I don't agree with randomly bombing northern Isaraeli towns but I can certainly understand why Hezbollah feel justified in engaging Israel militarily and capturing their soldiers.

God it pisses me off.  Fine the US won't fuck with any other countries.  We also will stop helping them.  Every big disaster another country has -who comes to save them?  The USA.  Who gives the most money to the UN?  THE USA.  And what thanks do we get?  Whiny drivel and backwards ass logic from people like you. Its a catch 22.  The bottom line is that Isolationoism DOES NOT WORK.  It got us into WWI & WWII.  Hitler was a psycho (hopefully you'd agree with me on that one). Say we did nothing then as you suggest.  What happens?   

Thousands of lives wasted for nothing?  Are you kidding me?  Are you refering to Saddam's removal?  How many lives did he and his son waste?

How is the term judeochristian offensive?.  It is how it the relegion came to be.  FACT.  You know what I find it offensive?  Adults that brainwash teens and children into beleving that they must strap explosives to themselves and kill as many Jews as possible...  OH, the muslim faith haa NOTHING TO DO WITH CHRISTIANITY-save the fact that they want to eliminate it.

What the hell are you writing of "Two wrongs don't make a write"?  This isn't recess or the playground.  It is a war with people who don't share the same values as I do.   I defer to my suicide bombing references.  As far as I'm concerned the US and Israel has taken the high road in morality.  If I was the President of the US (Lebenon, Syria, Iran, North Korea should thank their lucky stars I'm not) I'd nuke them all.  That is exactly what they would do to us if they had nukes.  But the fact is that not everyone in their country is evil -so they try to restrain from needless loss of life.

Oh who started the last war with Israel?  POW's are POW's you ain't gonna let the enemy go so they can just rejoin their little army.  Maybe Israel should let them go, that be fair right? bah.

You know the more I read your threads I have come to realize that you are somewhat of an anti-semite and I will not be reading any more of your posts or replies.  You are welcome to re-read this as many times over and over again but first try standing in front of a mirror... Say, "I can't be this stupid", and then smack yourself hard in the face.  Then go back and read what I wrote and watch what the fanatics say.  If your mind hasn't changed repeat the mirror self smacking.  If it still doesn't work...  Go practice being a suicide bomber in your backyard.  Don't give up until you got it right.

Last edited by DBBrinson1 (2006-08-12 08:34:45)

Let's go off the deep end here on logic - note - this is a compelling argument only, I do not believe the Liberty was attacked for spying.  I do believe Israel may have thought it was spying.  But I was angling a different way:

The theory is that US did not respond because it was spying.  The questions: why didn't the US do something?  If nothing was done, does this mean they got caught spying?  This is a compelling argument, even if you don't believe it.

So there are two options: either we got caught spying and therefore could not respond without it coming to light, OR it was better for the US to ignore it.

I apologize for bringing in the conspiracy theory which I think is too far fetched.  The purpose was not to say "we deserved it".  It was meant to point out it was more in our interests to ignore it.

The point I was trying to make with the U2 overflight was that spying is a justiable reason for retailation, and is an example of another nation sending a message.  Spying can be a cause for war, which is why I thought it would be good to show another example as background for "message choice".

The fact is, the Liberty incident is a loose end.  No one really knows the why's.

I guess my "Boy that sucks" comment was meant to convey - Israel, quit committing us to the spiral of violence.  Unfortunately, we keep getting sucked in.  I welcome this role, however - I don't think any other country can do it right now.  So it's the lesser of two evils.

And, if you think this policy is incorrect, that's your perogative.  I feel better that at least one country is taking an active role.

And, re: lighten up.  This was a baseless baiting thread.  Someone had to take the bait to attempt an argument.  I had some spare time, so Cam & I went a couple of rounds.  I usually only post when I think, wow...ridiculous...

On a side note - you should really read up on the U2...its really interesting.  Eisenhower personally approved the overflights because violating Soviet warspace was considered an act of war.  Although the CIA claimed the plane could not be seen on radar and never shot down, the Soviets actually scrambled jets every time one was aloft. 

Had the flights not flown, our economy would be much different today.  The data the planes collected allowed us to spend less in defense spending because it showed the Soviets' readiness and deployments to be lower (the CIA was not as established in the USSR as their counterparts) than estimated.  To show it's power, the U2 took a pass over Eisenhower during golf, and you could make out the ball!  So the hard-line Soviets were using the U2 incident to increase Cold War tensions.  Eisenhower and Kruschev were in favor of lessening these tensions, but their advisors were against it.  Eisenhower stated his only regret was not being able to improve Soviet-US relations during his term.

From my point of view, the U2 project was well worth the gamble.  Of course, it wouldn't have been necessary had the CIA had better assets...

Pug wrote:

Sorry, I do not think Liberty is relevant because the US showed the aggression by spying on Israel.

So to sum up - 1) Israel is an ally, 2) Boy that sucks.

You are a pathetic American.

You're justifying the killing of 34 of our guys by Israel because they were supposedly spying?

If my friend spies on me, i'm suppose to kill him?

Apprently so in your backwards little Zionist world.

This is the exact type of overreacting Israel has shown throughout this war with Lebanon with the merciless bombing of civilians.