Germany/France vs Israel

[emmytee]

http://www.guerrilla..an_ship_near_Lebanon

This is just one incident that has occured, if you read the article it says the french are selling the lebonese state of the art ground to air missles, and that the germans and french are half threatening to shoot at Israeli jets if they keep flying over Lebanon and (more importantly) her allies troops.

Personally I think israeli air superiority in the region being threatend would be a good thing, as they would then need a really good reason to start attacking the surrounding countries.

[Glendale]

They did have a good reason. Their soldiers were kidnapped. If you were a leader of a country, would you leave your soldiers to their own fate?

And because of the international community, the soldiers are still missing. All those deaths mean nothing now.

[SouthAsian]

i hope Germany/France teach that bitch ass country a little lesson.I'm angry at Israel,they think they can do what they want.

[cellardoor6]

At 10/27/06 09:06 AM, emmytee wrote: http://www.guerrilla..an_ship_near_Lebanon

This is just one incident that has occured, if you read the article it says the french are selling the lebonese state of the art ground to air missles, and that the germans and french are half threatening to shoot at Israeli jets if they keep flying over Lebanon and (more importantly) her allies troops.

First of all, you got that from gorilla news, which is a completely non-credible news source.

Personally I think israeli air superiority in the region being threatend would be a good thing, as they would then need a really good reason to start attacking the surrounding countries

If Israeli air superiority (its actually air supremacy if a war happened) was threatened, or stopped. It wouldn't really be a good thing, all it would do would prevent Israel from protecting itself without using ground troops. This would just lead to bigger wars because the blood-thirsty Arabs that surround Israel would exploit any opportunity to attack Israel conventionally if they thought they could achieve any bit of success. Then Israel would have to rely on low-flying helicopters, or ground forces, and that would just cause more casualties on both sides.

But if Israelis air superiority was actually threatened which it isn't (Israel has state of the art countermeasures), the US wouldn't allow that to happen. The US would just give Israel more military aide in order to ensure that the Israeli Airforce was still predominant in the region.
If it actually came down to Israeli being vulnerable to anti-aircraft systems provided by the French or Germans, then the US could block that action, or just give Israel more advanced systems, or even maybe some stealth aircraft.

At 10/27/06 02:21 PM, EcKo-WR wrote: i hope Germany/France teach that bitch ass country a little lesson.I'm angry at Israel,they think they can do what they want.

You arab?

[jlwelch]

If Germany and France give stuff to the enemies of Israel, the Israeli government would simply go to the US for better stuff. Essentially, it would only stimulate the American arms market and I am sure that the US weaponry pwns German/Frence weaponry big time.

[cellardoor6]

At 10/27/06 05:29 PM, jlwelch wrote: If Germany and France give stuff to the enemies of Israel, the Israeli government would simply go to the US for better stuff. Essentially, it would only stimulate the American arms market and I am sure that the US weaponry pwns German/Frence weaponry big time.

It does. And most of Germanies high-tech weapon systems are based on older American systems, same with France for the most part. France does have SOME advanced weapon systems like radar and anti-aircraft technology but it is still worthless against US jamming technology and stealth technology.

[cellardoor6]

At 10/27/06 05:56 PM, MickTheChampion wrote: Israel isn't even a real country, all those Jews should just fuck off and give that land back to it's rightful owners.

Fucking illegal occupation.

Um, every country in the WORLD is only a country because it exerted power over others and took land.

Israel isn't an illegal occupation because Jews migrated there and became more powerful and took back land that they actually ruled over for thousands of years. That would be like saying that the high concentration of Hispanics in California is an illegal occupation.

Actually its PALESTINE that isn't a real country. There has NEVER been a "Palestinian" state. The land that Israel is now on is called Palestine, but it was never a country, and most "Palestinians" who make false claims that it is their land, have actually only migrated there recently as well, The notion of a "Palestinian nation" is a MYTH used by Muslims for anti-Jew propaganda. Arabs-Muslims have never had self rule in Israel.

Now, Israel IS a real country because it is a soveireign nation and is democratically elected. There are even Muslims in Israel's parliament who are LOYAL Israelis! All Arabs that have in the Holy Land for generations still live in their land, and all the ones that swear peace to Israel are allowed to live in any part of Israel or the Palestinian territories they want. Israel isn't illegally occupying anything, they migrated BACK to Israel after having been displaced multiple times by invading conquerors (including Arabs) and now they are back in their homeland.

By saying Israel is an illegal occupation is just showing that you don't understand history. Besides, Israel is a DEMOCRACY where Arab/Muslim Israelis can vote and are represented. The Arabs who once lived there before the reestablished nation of Israel live in the land of their inheritance, its just the blood-thirsty Arabs that live in the "Palestinian" territories.

[Camarohusky]

At 10/27/06 06:10 PM, cellardoor6 wrote: Actually its PALESTINE that isn't a real country. There has NEVER been a "Palestinian" state. The land that Israel is now on is called Palestine, but it was never a country, and most "Palestinians" who make false claims that it is their land, have actually only migrated there recently as well, The notion of a "Palestinian nation" is a MYTH used by Muslims for anti-Jew propaganda. Arabs-Muslims have never had self rule in Israel.

So, you're saying that any country that did not have previous claim to the land should not be able to be a country? What about the USA? There was no ancient "united states of the new world" so why should we claim legitimacy to our land now?

By saying Israel is an illegal occupation is just showing that you don't understand history. Besides, Israel is a DEMOCRACY where Arab/Muslim Israelis can vote and are represented. The Arabs who once lived there before the reestablished nation of Israel live in the land of their inheritance, its just the blood-thirsty Arabs that live in the "Palestinian" territories.

Who ever said Democracy was the right was country should be? Who ever said Democracy automatically makes one country better than another?

[Forums]

At 10/27/06 09:54 PM, Camarohusky wrote: Who ever said Democracy was the right was country should be? Who ever said Democracy automatically makes one country better than another?

I'm afraid you didn't read his thought process carefully enough.
He isn't using democracy as a way of saying Israel is "better" than any country, he's just stating that because Israel is a democracy, even Arabs/Muslims are represented in the country.

[troubles1]

At 10/27/06 02:21 PM, EcKo-WR wrote: i hope Germany/France teach that bitch ass country a little lesson.I'm angry at Israel,they think they can do what they want.

OF course you do, you are Muslim and therefore want to kill all the Jew's, here guys check it out another Muslim Nazi.. Hitter would be so proud of you. maybe you can start the new SS -troups. and try to have another genocide on the Jewish people.
if the Islamic people would leave Israel alone leave them in peace and quit breaking every treaty that is signed or offered , no more people would suffer. But you are a Muslim and think you can kill anyone you want. just like these Muslim Nazis in ww2. ISLAMIC- NAZIS

[Deadpool]

If the israeli people wouldnt steal land from people maybe they would be left alone.

[Camarohusky]

At 10/27/06 10:06 PM, Forums wrote: I'm afraid you didn't read his thought process carefully enough.
He isn't using democracy as a way of saying Israel is "better" than any country, he's just stating that because Israel is a democracy, even Arabs/Muslims are represented in the country.

Trust me, I read his post very carefully, and I know that ON THE SURFACE he was only saying that it gave other groups representation. Yet, I know better than to just read that out of it. This isn't a text book saying this, this is Cellardoor saying this. Read between the lines, and read up on the authour and you will easily see that he was not only stating a fact, but subtly (whetehr he knew it or not) asserting Democracy's superiority at the same time.

[emmytee]

thats the same cellardor who just descibed the "bloodthirsty arabs" a few posts up.....

[Edvin]

At 10/28/06 05:05 AM, Deadpool wrote: If the israeli people wouldnt steal land from people maybe they would be left alone.

Same thing for the arabs reciprocally.

[SouthAsian]

At 10/27/06 04:56 PM, Principal-Peterson wrote:

At 10/27/06 02:21 PM, EcKo-WR wrote: i hope Germany/France teach that bitch ass country a little lesson.I'm angry at Israel,they think they can do what they want.

You arab?

No, and very nice assuming that all arabs hate Israel.I don't normally talk this way about Israel but so many times they have gone too far on the world stage.

[BillKillerz]

Yay but Israel use f*cking Cluster Bomb near a civilian population ! And that a war crime ! Cluster munitions spread small bombs over a wide area, many of which do not explode on impact but remain live and lethal. So far the UN Mine Action Coordination Center (MACC) has identified some 770 sites contaminated with an estimated one million unexploded Israeli cluster bombs in South Lebanon. More sites continue to be identified.
Almost all the cluster bombs launched by Israeli forces were launched in the last 72 hours of the conflict – after the ceasefire had been agreed on 11 August. That crazy !

[emmytee]

At 10/27/06 04:37 PM, cellardoor6 wrote:

First of all, you got that from gorilla news, which is a completely non-credible news source.

You obviously didn't research that in any other way than thinking the title sounded left-wing. Gorilla news doesnt have any of its own articles on it, people send in link to and summarys of stories from elsewhere. In this case, 'reuters'

http://today.reuters..=World-C1-Headline-9

[Dragon-Smaug]

At 10/27/06 09:54 PM, Camarohusky wrote: So, you're saying that any country that did not have previous claim to the land should not be able to be a country? What about the USA? There was no ancient "united states of the new world" so why should we claim legitimacy to our land now?

Who ever said Democracy was the right was country should be? Who ever said Democracy automatically makes one country better than another?

No, he’s just giving additional reasons (above and beyond the obvious one that the U.N. made Israel a country, which then fought and won a war for survival) for Israel’s right to exist. See, Israel, for reasons I cannot explain, is often criticized for doing things every country has done. Capturing land in war and trying to kill one’s enemies in battle are indisputably actions taken by almost every country at one point or another. Yet, Israel captures land in a defensive war or something, and it’s right to do so is questioned by an [unfortunately increasing] few. So, oftentimes defenders of Israel feel compelled to give additional reasons why Israel deserves to do what it does.

I agree, however, that previous claim to a land does not necessarily give one rights over the land (which includes the Arab Palestinians), and that democracy is not the only way for a country to be successful or free.

At 10/28/06 05:05 AM, Deadpool wrote: If the israeli people wouldnt steal land from people maybe they would be left alone.

If the inhabitants of that land didn’t attack Israel maybe Israel wouldn’t have captured it.

Also, if Israel hadn't captured that land, they would just be smaller, more vulnerable, have had more people killed (because capturing land helped end the wars) and still under attack.

@ BillKillerz:

Yeah. If Israel did use those cluster bombs it’s bad. Except in the areas where they warned the population; that’s alright.

[CaMd]

The UN is worthless..
Get out if you can't do the job and stop blaming overflights for being "discomfiting".
the Flights need to continue as long as they serve a useful security purpose.

[TheSovereign]

Better idea, nuke all of the middle east!

[Deadpool]

Dragon if a country invaded you wouldnt you fight back for as long as you humanly could and kill as many of the invaders as you can?

[lapis]

At 10/28/06 01:26 PM, Dragon-Smaug wrote: Yet, Israel captures land in a defensive war or something, and it’s right to do so is questioned by an [unfortunately increasing] few.

When people say "defensive war" they usually refer to the type of war you don't start. If the US government decided to rename a certain part of Iraq "New Utah" and move in about 384,000 Caucasian American settlers then I think people would condemn it for about the same reasons they dislike Israel not returning to the pre-1967 borders. You, on the other hand, would consider it to be the pinnacle of ethically just behaviour, I assume.

Yeah. If Israel did use those cluster bombs it’s bad. Except in the areas where they warned the population; that’s alright.

Really. A reasonable number of cluster bomblets do not explode directly when hitting the ground. Every time a child has his or her leg blown off due to stepping on a bomblet the blood is on the hands of Olmert and Peretz.

[CaMd]

At 10/28/06 02:46 PM, TheSovereign wrote: Better idea, nuke all of the middle east!

yeah..Most Middle Easterners are acutely aware that the Middle East sucks. I feel bad for people who live there..There's too many problems.

[Dragon-Smaug]

At 10/28/06 02:49 PM, Deadpool wrote: Dragon if a country invaded you wouldnt you fight back for as long as you humanly could and kill as many of the invaders as you can?

Yes.

At 10/28/06 03:02 PM, lapis wrote:

At 10/28/06 01:26 PM, Dragon-Smaug wrote: Yet, Israel captures land in a defensive war or something, and it’s right to do so is questioned by an [unfortunately increasing] few.

When people say "defensive war" they usually refer to the type of war you don't start.

Do you think the 1948 or 1967 wars were not self-defensive?

As for your Iraq example, the U.S. did not capture Iraq. Iraq is not destined to become a territory of the U.S. The leader of Iraq even disagreed with the U.S. on something about terrorism, much to America’s dislike. The U.S. has changed and attempted to mold Iraq and it’s government, and continues to defend with arms the government system it put in place, but Iraq is still very much it’s own country.

As for the settlement of Jews in the captured lands of the 1967 war, they were not just plunked down on top of Arab Palestinians.

Yeah. If Israel did use those cluster bombs it’s bad. Except in the areas where they warned the population; that’s alright.

Really. A reasonable number of cluster bomblets do not explode directly when hitting the ground. Every time a child has his or her leg blown off due to stepping on a bomblet the blood is on the hands of Olmert and Peretz.

Do cluster bombs not explode a higher percentage of the time than other comparable bombs cease to explode?

[Dragon-Smaug]

Looking at your article, I see that the amount of cluster bombs that did not explode was unusually and unpredictably high. This is an unpredictable and unfortunate occurance.

At 10/28/06 09:21 AM, EcKo-WR wrote: No

I win!

[jlwelch]

Personally I think the only way the Middle East is ever going to be stabilzed is to allow Israel to take over the whole area and keep the sandmonkeys on a leash. I hope the US continues to support them too.

At 10/28/06 04:57 PM, jlwelch wrote: Personally I think the only way the Middle East is ever going to be stabilzed is to allow Israel to take over the whole area and keep the sandmonkeys on a leash. I hope the US continues to support them too.

lol you and your sarcasm. At least say that you hate them after you make your post man.

[lapis]

At 10/28/06 04:25 PM, Dragon-Smaug wrote: Do you think the 1948 or 1967 wars were not self-defensive?

1967? Considering that Israel started it, no, not really. Especially not in the Northeast, which Dayan even admitted.

As for your Iraq example, the U.S. did not capture Iraq. Iraq is not destined to become a territory of the U.S.

But since you think preemptive strikes constitute defensive action, the second Gulf War was a defensive war so it would be perfectly legal for the United States to start moving in settlers according to your logic. I know there are no plans for this, Smaug, that's wasn't the issue by far. The issue is whether or not it would be morally justified if they did decide to do so. So speak out: would it be justified or not?

As for the settlement of Jews in the captured lands of the 1967 war, they were not just plunked down on top of Arab Palestinians.

Well, they moved into their land. I'm not not saying that the American settlers would move directly into Baghdad or Basra, they could move into whatever empty space there is between Baghdad and Basra.

Looking at your article, I see that the amount of cluster bombs that did not explode was unusually and unpredictably high. This is an unpredictable and unfortunate occurance.

If you had read it you'd have known that the normal non-explosion rate is already 10-15%. They knew they were taking a risk when they shelled the area with cluster bombs, just because more bombs will lay there unexploded than predicted doesn't mean that they didn't already decide that the resulting harm was irrelevant to them. They dropped the bombs, they knew innocents would suffer, the blood is entirely on their hands.