Quote:
Originally Posted by aktarian
Well, I don't agree with that. I believe only 1948 was self defence, 1967 had elements of self defence, 1973 was about territories from which Israel should withdraw anyway (same as 1991 war with Iraq) while 1956 and 1982 were wars of choice
|
As you said, '48 was in self-defence. 1967 was a pre-emptive strike (i.e. I said "invaded, or
designed to invade..."). The Arabs were planning on invading, the Israelis got wind of it, and launched a pre-emptive strike. Because those nations were ready is one of the reasons why Israel nearly lost when they had the advantage of surprise. '73 was about territories that Israel occupied while in defence of itself, and the Arabs again launched a surprise attack with the aim of
destroying Israel (note, they weren't planning on merely taking back lost land). Saddam took Kuwait in an act of greed, and aggression; Israel took the Golan Heights, Sinai, and portions of the West Bank out of defense during wars of aggression performed against them by Arab nations. In 1956 Egypt nationalized the Suez canal, an international waterway, that could have crippled commerce, specifically Israeli. It was a war of choice, but not instigated by Israel. I believe that it was justified because of Israel's interest in the Suez regard to their trade. The Suez canal connects the Israeli port of Elat with their Mediterranean ports, and is a shortcut to Europe, and North America for tradeships. Israel did the world a service imo. Israel's invasion of Lebanon in '82 was for similar motives as in 2006. Terrorists were sheltering there, and were attacking Israel. The only difference is that Israel failed miserably in 2006.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aktarian
Depends. IMO Arab nukes would bring stability to region and provide some sort of deterrant for Israel. So less wars and less agressive policy on both sides.
|
The Arabs have proven that they can't be trusted with weapons in regard to Israel. The Arabs instigated the long years of war since 1948, have repeatedly tried to wipe Israel off the map, and you think that they can be trusted with nukes?
Israel has never threatened to use nukes except to make clear that they'll use them if they were to be defeated in battle to the point that their existence were in question-just like any other nations.
I may appear rabbidly pro-Zionist/Israel, but it I firmly believe in Israel's justification throughout their modern history.