Thread: The British Catastrophe

Originally Posted by zraver

Pretty much, why should those in the WB/EJ be punished for the actions of a government in Gaza?

Why shouldn't they? Or are you suggesting Israel simply put up with rocket attacks, suicide bombings abduction of it's citizens and whatever else the Palestinians and their supporters can come up with ad infinitum?

Originally Posted by zraver

They dismantled the settlements and cut off trade before Hamas was elected.

False. June 2007.
As for the settlements, that was the whole point yes? Exactly what you are calling for in the West Bank as well?

Originally Posted by zraver

PA corruption 1 along with its inability to win concessions from Israel as regards the blockade of Gaza 2 is why Hamas won. Israel declared war on the Palestinians first through the application of an 3 illegal occupation. A fact attested to by Israel's own supreme court and internal government documents.

1: PA corruption is not Israels responsibility.

2: As already shown, the blockade began after Hamas was elected, BY Israel, Egypt and sanctions by the Quartet on the Middle East.

3: You've already stated that in your mind the Gaza Strip and West Bank are separate issues, yet here you are conflating the two for your own purposes.

Three false statements in one sentence. Impressive.

Originally Posted by zraver

it would make the fight more fair anyway, because Israel does use F-16's and Apaches against the Palestinians.

Why should the war be 'fair'?

Originally Posted by zraver

AIPAC spent almost 88 million during the 2008 election cycle- a group funded with foreign money is making campaign contributions and that is corruption. A former director of the CIA claimed AIPAC should have registered as a foreign group, they've been accused of spying, one director had to quit after he was recorded bragging how much ($14 billion) AIPAC got for Israel in one year. The influence it gains is through the money it is willing to spend to let those who are willing to do business with them win at the ballot box.

What is the problem with Israel receiving foreign funding and assistance?

Originally Posted by zraver

Or do you mean 67, in which case where Israel was attacked- the land gained is legit but only if taken from the territory of the aggressor. Not territory the aggressor was already illegally occupying. .

Under what terms do you consider Jordans annexation of the West Bank illegal, given it's immediate annexation contiguous with the end of the British Mandate and recognized as an annexation by the British? What happened to the citizenship of the Jordanians in the West Bank post 1967?

Originally Posted by zraver

You said my choice for Judaism was the ghetto so yes you did.

No I did not. Antisemitism is a word. When you can find that word in my statement come back to me. In the meantime, I stand by this

Originally Posted by parihaka

You have repeatedly offered your opinion that the only premis you'd allow Israel's continued existence given the opportunity would be withdrawal to indefensible borders, an exact and precise return to ghetto.

Originally Posted by Parihaka

No I did not. Antisemitism is a word. When you can find that word in my statement come back to me. In the meantime, I stand by this

If your going to make the accusation at least have the courage of your convictions. A play on words to say something while giving yourself a politician like co-opt is beneath you. Israel's borders are not indefensible she has peace treaties with both states near the area in question and beat them both soundly every time they tried. Poland in 39 had indefensible borders.

Nor does me desiring an equal opportunity for both peoples amount to want the Jews in a ghetto. However, if you think Israel has a right to the WB and EJ then you've come out in favor of Palestinian ghettos, expulsion or extermination- which is it?

Originally Posted by zraver

If your going to make the accusation at least have the courage of your convictions.

For the third time I'm not nor have I made the accusation. This is merely a ploy on your part to play the victim while spamming Palestinian propaganda, as I've also pointed out in my previous posts.

Originally Posted by zraver

Israel's borders are not indefensible she has peace treaties with both states near the area in question and beat them both soundly every time they tried.

As has been pointed out several times over multiple threads including by you IIRC, the gap militarily between Israel and her neighbours has been closed over the last twenty five years, and Israel has been attacked five times by Arab coalition forces including Jordan, four times using Jordan as a staging post.
As history has shown, the Arab states can lose multiple times and still survive: Israel need lose only once and be wiped out.

Originally Posted by zraver

Nor does me desiring an equal opportunity for both peoples amount to want the Jews in a ghetto. However, if you think Israel has a right to the WB and EJ then you've come out in favor of Palestinian ghettos, expulsion or extermination- which is it?

You need to look up the etymology of 'ghetto'.

The Palestinians are not being restricted to ghettos by the Israelis: culturally, genetically and linguistically they are identical to their bretheren in Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria. Until the end of the British mandate they could move freely between what is now all those states. From '48 until '67 those in what is now Gaza held Egyptian Passports, those in the West Bank Jordanian.
After '67 both groups were stripped of citizenship of those countries and either expelled from those countries in Egypt and Jordans case or confined to ghettos in Lebanon and Syria's case.
Perhaps you might consider examining those countries actions in keeping their fellow Arabs in those ghettos, rather than trying to squeeze the Israelis into one as well.

The Palestinians have proved a very willing bayonet for the confrontation states while their whipping boy domestically. Odd that they couldn't find amenable communities in Jordan, Egypt, Tunesia and Lebanon among their muslim compatriots and are eagerly (along with Pakistanis) enslaved by their gulf employers.

Now...this two-state side-by-side thingy? Screw that. I've seen nothing indicating a Palestinian kleptocracy can function as a viable government sharing borders with Israel. Really, though, it's not their fault. I've seen nothing indicating an arab/muslim state can function as a viable government sharing borders with their brother muslim/arabs. So it likely goes deeper than those dastardly Jews. And it's sure-as-hell (pardon the expression) not Israel's cross to bear.

So...I vote expulsion. Let their olive groves flourish (or decay) elsewhere among their kindred souls and like kind. Let there be recognized by all that a deep and mutual antagonism, never to be reconciled amicably, exists between Israel and the caliphate. Let those outside this cantankerous stew fund and arm their proteges accordingly and hasten Armageddon to our doorstep.

What the hell? This dancing needs to stop and a spade called a spade.

pari,

one quibble here.

As has been pointed out several times over multiple threads including by you IIRC, the gap militarily between Israel and her neighbours has been closed over the last twenty five years,

not true.

in fact, part of US policy is to ensure there is always a steady gap.

Originally Posted by astralis

pari,

one quibble here.



not true.

in fact, part of US policy is to ensure there is always a steady gap.

Against one country such as Egypt perhaps though I'd be interested in seeing an Abrams vs Merkava comparison. Egypt also has a damn strong airforce, which cannot be surprised the way it was in '67.
However, when you combine Egypt's armed forces and intel capabilities with Jordans SF and command and control centre, along with Syria's (excluding current goings on) air defence systems and army, even without the House of Saud's weapons supplies israel is heavily outnumbered. One on one with Egypt would be difficult, against Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Hezbollah, Hamas and Saudi weapons, I can't see how they'd survive.
Of course I'm no expert militarily and with the current ructions sweeping Arabia nothing united is going to happen anytime soon but if the various players do get their shyt together and with both Petraeus and IIRC Mullins statements that the US's current policy toward Israel is counter-productive, I don't fancy Israels chances 15 years out from now.

Pari,the Egyptian abrams are ''monkey models''.No Chobham armor and no latest electronics.Weapons are relatively important,but the most important aspect are men.In this regard I'd say unless the Israelis go against real men,like the Turks or the Persians,they're safe for the next 1000 years.

Originally Posted by Mihais

Pari,the Egyptian abrams are ''monkey models''.No Chobham armor and no latest electronics.

Hm, being fundamentally ignorant I'll stay out of that one. I would like to see a Merkava 4 vs M1a1 thread though.... In fact....

As for the Arabs, they fight abysmally badly until one day they don't, as both the Crusaders and the Turks found out. It might take a thousand years though

"...monkey models"?

This article suggests that the vehicles received by the Egyptian government are co-produced...and capable.

"We've sold you our M1A1 Abrams!"

"Wonderful!"

"Yup. Looks like Tarzan. Fights like Jane. You'll be really pleased at parades, though. So too the Iraqis and Saudis."

Doesn't make sense.

Originally Posted by Parihaka

For the third time I'm not nor have I made the accusation. This is merely a ploy on your part to play the victim while spamming Palestinian propaganda, as I've also pointed out in my previous posts.

When you accuse someone of wanting to put Jews in Ghettos and being a shrill for Palestinians the evidence speaks for itself.

As has been pointed out several times over multiple threads including by you IIRC, the gap militarily between Israel and her neighbours has been closed over the last twenty five years, and Israel has been attacked five times by Arab coalition forces including Jordan, four times using Jordan as a staging post.
As history has shown, the Arab states can lose multiple times and still survive: Israel need lose only once and be wiped out.

Those arguments I made are a couple of years old now. Assuming the Syrian CW get neutralized Syria, its economy is in shambles, if Assad falls Russian weapons contracts are void, Iranian scheming is dealt a heavy blow, Hezzbollah is weakened... The balance of power is swing towards Israel.

You need to look up the etymology of 'ghetto'.

The Palestinians are not being restricted to ghettos by the Israelis: culturally, genetically and linguistically they are identical to their bretheren in Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria. Until the end of the British mandate they could move freely between what is now all those states. From '48 until '67 those in what is now Gaza held Egyptian Passports, those in the West Bank Jordanian.

The same arguments could be made for New Zealanders, Australians and Americans vis a vis the UK. Or Austria and Gemany, France and large parts of Belgium... More importantly genetically the closest relatives are the Jews. Thwey have roots in the land as old as the Jews, most of them descend from Jewish root stock.They are a people and deserve their own state. And yes they are being restricted to ghettos, they get less water, cannot build or even repair their homes, are denied schools and hospitals consumerate with their population, cannot move about freely, do not have the right to peaceful trade with those they wish...
After '67 both groups were stripped of citizenship of those countries and either expelled from those countries in Egypt and Jordans case or confined to ghettos in Lebanon and Syria's case.

Perhaps you might consider examining those countries actions in keeping their fellow Arabs in those ghettos, rather than trying to squeeze the Israelis into one as well.

Different issues, to matters not how bad or how well they treat them the discussion is Israel's violations of international law. BTW you might want to check on Jordan, of 2 million Palestinian refugees in Jordan, only 130ish thousand do not have Jordanian citizenship. The only revoking of citizenship is those Palestinians who move from the West Bank to Jordan. This is a political move to keep Israel from simply forcibly expelling them.

Israel has been in control of the territories for decades and has spent untold billions on projects designed to foster animosity. I've posted videos of the IDF protecting settlers who are shooting Palestinians and burning their fields. All this time Israel could have been spending money building up the social institutions needed for the rule of law to prevail. We in the west didn't come by it overnight. Instead Israel has demonstrated over and over again the the rule of law has no meaning when its Jew on Arab, only Arab on Jew.

Originally Posted by zraver

When you accuse someone of wanting to put Jews in Ghettos and being a shrill for Palestinians the evidence speaks for itself.

Your paranoia is not my concern.

Originally Posted by zraver

Those arguments I made are a couple of years old now. Assuming the Syrian CW get neutralized Syria, its economy is in shambles, if Assad falls Russian weapons contracts are void, Iranian scheming is dealt a heavy blow, Hezzbollah is weakened... The balance of power is swing towards Israel.

Swings away, swings toward, swings away, swings toward. As I said in response to Asty,

Against one country such as Egypt perhaps though I'd be interested in seeing an Abrams vs Merkava comparison. Egypt also has a damn strong airforce, which cannot be surprised the way it was in '67.
However, when you combine Egypt's armed forces and intel capabilities with Jordans SF and command and control centre, along with Syria's (excluding current goings on) air defence systems and army, even without the House of Saud's weapons supplies israel is heavily outnumbered. One on one with Egypt would be difficult, against Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Hezbollah, Hamas and Saudi weapons, I can't see how they'd survive.
Of course I'm no expert militarily and with the current ructions sweeping Arabia nothing united is going to happen anytime soon but if the various players do get their shyt together and with both Petraeus and IIRC Mullins statements that the US's current policy toward Israel is counter-productive, I don't fancy Israels chances 15 years out from now.

Originally Posted by zraver

The same arguments could be made for New Zealanders, Australians and Americans vis a vis the UK.

Of course they can. And that negates my point how precisely?

Originally Posted by zraver

Different issues, to matters not how bad or how well they treat them the discussion is Israel's violations of international law.

No they are not, that is your pretence to thereby focus the issue purely on Israel and ignore the wider areas responsibility.