Thread: War !!!

Now you've quoted from this article and highlighted the last sentence, do you care to enlighten us all to the facts concerned, and as to who these "people who are determined to find equivalence" are?

Originally Posted by stroller

Now you've quoted from this article and highlighted the last sentence, do you care to enlighten us all to the facts concerned, and as to who these "people who are determined to find equivalence" are?

Are you messing with me ? Or is there a disconnect between English speaking/writing/reading ability and actual comprehension ? This is a serious question if all you can do is give me a smart ass retort then don't waste your time.

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

But just what had Israel done to set off these latest terrorist acts? It voluntarily pulled out of Gaza, after evacuating its own settlers, and left the land to the Palestinian authorities. Terrorists then used the newly acquired land to launch rockets into Israel and then seized an Israeli soldier. Other terrorists in Lebanon followed suit. The great mantra of the past, "trading land for peace," is now thoroughly discredited, or should be.

If only things were that simple.

Originally Posted by Marmite the Dog

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

But just what had Israel done to set off these latest terrorist acts? It voluntarily pulled out of Gaza, after evacuating its own settlers, and left the land to the Palestinian authorities. Terrorists then used the newly acquired land to launch rockets into Israel and then seized an Israeli soldier. Other terrorists in Lebanon followed suit. The great mantra of the past, "trading land for peace," is now thoroughly discredited, or should be.

If only things were that simple.

You've already proven to me you're not one of the simpletons MtD. You're always even keeled for the most part.

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

Are you messing with me ? Or is there a disconnect between English speaking/writing/reading ability and actual comprehension ? This is a serious question if all you can do is give me a smart ass retort then don't waste your time.

Just wondering whether 'these people' is meant as another attack on "liberals" in general, some posters on this forum, some journalists or commentators, or for what you quoted from the article, without making a connection to what has been said in this thread.
Or are you too lazy to add your own words?

Originally Posted by stroller

Just wondering whether 'these people' is meant as another attack on "liberals" in general, some posters on this forum, some journalists or commentators, or for what you quoted from the article, without making a connection to what has been said in this thread.
Or are you too lazy to add your own words?

If you would notice it was a very short cut-n-paste paragraph. How that translates into you attacking me reveals alot about you. Rather than critique the post you've chosen to critque me.

Just in case your Enlgish skills are even worse than I suspected that's called attacking the messenger instead of the message.

If you weren't so stupid you would have been able to avoid this lecture.

Aren't you a moderator in this part of the forum ? It appears you don't know the rules against personal attacks.

IMHO you posters who consider yourselves strong debaters ... just make up your debating rules as you go along.

You should just put the false pretense aside and admit cussin' and discussin' is alot more fun and alot less complicated.

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

IMHO you posters who consider yourselves strong debaters ... just make up your debating rules as you go along.

You should just put the false pretense aside and admit cussin' and discussin' is alot more fun and alot less complicated.

Yep...the cussin' & discussin' crowd are your basic defeat & retreat bunch...

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

You've already proven to me you're not one of the simpletons MtD.

Sucker!

Originally Posted by surasak

But without instability there then the government can't justify putting United States forces in the area.

It's all part of a carefully calculated plot to get American troops in a strategic position to control the flow of Middle East oil (even though America gets a minority % of oil from the ME the ME still has large reserves of easy to get oil).

Does anyone for a moment think we'd support Israel were it not for all the oil there?

We all know the U.S. just doesnt' care about suffering people. That was a poor excuse used to invade Iraq. The premise of WMD was a weak one at best. It's a strategic invasion that no country could stop, sort of like a person who would rob a bank knowing that they can get away with it because there aren't any police around. I bet 20 years from now when China's military reaches parity with the U.S. another Iraq couldn't happen.

We are still a net importer (witness the trade deficit) and selling arms is a way of trying to balance that out. The only way to sell arms is create a need, and, you create a need by creating instability.

Bush 41 was reluctant to get involved in Somalia but he finally gave in to media pressure and he mounted a humanitarian mission with the UN. In May of 1993 during a ceremony on the White House lawn a general in charge of the military troops dispensing aid told then President Clinton, "Mission accomplished." Sometime after that Clinton gave his nation building speech and Somalia became a nation building mission. A theory went around that the reason we were staying in Somalia was because of the huge abandoned Soviet airstrip which could be used by US troops as a location to stage a rapid response in the Gulf region.

Here's a reference to the airstrip:

The airstrip at Berbera, constructed by the Soviets in 1976, is over three miles long, making it among Africa's longest. During the Iran hostage crisis in 1979, Jimmy Carter viewed the Somali bases as one of the few potential launching points for American forces attempting to rescue the American hostages in Tehran.

NomadNet:PRESERVING AMERICAN SECURITY TIES TO SOMALIA

Back to the original topic:

In the battle against Hezbollah Israel has come up against massive resistance. The advance on the village of Bint Jbail was the deadliest day for the Israeli army so far. Rapidly wiping out the terrorists with Israel's high-tech army now appears a distant dream.

On the map the war looks so straight forward. An Israeli commander has marked Hezbollah strongholds in south Lebanon red for the purposes of our briefing -- lately practically all of the towns north of the Israeli border are colored red. Marked with blue crosses are the strategically important positions, mostly crossroads, now controlled by Israel. "Now we have to just go in and deal with the Hezbollah boys," the commander, who asked not to be identified, said. "There isn't much more to say."
...
The mission, christened "Just Reward," now appears much more difficult than first thought -- above all in terms of casualties. Since the small targeted ground operations began Israeli soldiers have been dying on a daily basis in heavy fire fights. Wednesday was especially bloody. In an attempt to take the Hezbollah stronghold of Bint Jbail, as many as 14 Israelis lost their lives.

Military analysts and politicians talked confidently at the beginning of the of the mission of targeted, surgical assaults against Hezbollah and an estimated conflict duration of about a week. Now Israel is increasingly preparing for a long war. Even the commander in Avivim just shrugs his shoulders when he is asked when the war will end. "We are fighting against an invisible enemy. Against fathers, who suddenly take up arms, against small hidden positions all over sudden Lebanon, against weapons concealed in bunkers," he says: "That can take a while."
...
That it would not remain simply an aerial war, must have been apparent to those responsible in Ehud Olmert's government. During the past few days Israeli newspapers have reported that two years ago an attack against Hezbollah was played out on the military planning table. The result: Simply by bombing the Hezbollah militia from a height of 10,000 meters would be ineffective against their small bunkers, plentiful weapons, and improvised yet functioning communications system.
...
For Hezbollah, pictures like those from Wednesday are the best propaganda possible. Dead Israeli soldiers and the wounded being carried back over the border on stretchers by their comrades -- exactly the sort of images the militants want the world to see. Their message: "Our areas cannot be taken." Over and over in recent days they have said how much they welcome the advances by the Israeli military. According to a spokesman for Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, they want to kill as many as 40 Israelis a day.
Israel's War Against Hezbollah: The Invisible Enemy - International - SPIEGEL ONLINE - News

Originally Posted by surasak

sadly America doesn't have the balls to do what's right.

Ah but we do and that's why we're in Iraq winning hearts & minds and giving the proletariet democracy!

Until the Russians put pressure on the US to get Israel to stop ... Israel will keep hammering away.

And they have been "hammering away" indeed:

"QANA, Lebanon (CNN) -- Israel agreed to halt airstrikes on southern Lebanon for 48 hours to investigate a Sunday raid that killed more than 60 civilians in Qana, Lebanon, an Israeli official said."
CNN.com - Israel halts airstrikes for 48 hours - Jul 30, 2006

Originally Posted by surasak

What many people in the US fail to account for is the true cost of oil. Not only is oil $75 per bbl now but the hidden costs of oil make it much more expensive. The support for Israel each year adds to the price of oil. Keeping unnecessary military bases in and around the Persian Gulf adds to the hidden cost of oil.

Seems to me we give money to just about everybody ... Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Israel and who else ?

Doesn't explain either why Saddam invaded Kuwait who he accused of holding down oil prices. And at the time we had that continuing "footprint" in the AOR as well as continuing support for Israel.

I think you're closer to being the right track with the refineries part of your response.

Well, Iraq did consider Kuwait to be the 19th province of Iraq.

You know, I wonder how many problems existed in the ME prior to Western nations drawing lines and establishing governments that weren't legitimate in the first place?

If power members of the world start considering the South as a different sovereign country from the rest of the U.S. does that make it right?

You know, if we simply lived as efficiently as Japan we wouldn't have all these problems. We were energy independent until after World War II. We could be but we won't take the necessary steps.