moderators
Crew
Posts: 326
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2004 6:33 am

Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Thu Aug 10, 2006 5:14 pm

Due to the number and length of posts in the Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 3 (by Moderators Aug 5 2006 in Non Aviation), here is part 4. Thank you very much to the posters in that thread for keeping the discussion civil. The same guidelines will be applied to this thread as to the previous one:

Quote:
This thread is for discussion and debate of the political issues revolving around the current Middle East conflict.

YOU ARE NOT TO POST INSULTS, ABUSE, INSINUATIONS ABOUT USERS, FLAMEBAIT, RACISM, INCITEMENTS TO VIOLENCE OR ANY OTHER THING WHICH WOULD BE IN BREACH OF THE DISCUSSION FORUM RULES.

Any posts which are removed from this thread for breaching the above condition will result in an AUTOMATIC 2 WEEK BAN, with the possibility of the ban being extended where the moderators feel the breach warrants it. You have been warned.

Please also see these other threads: Official Middle East Situation Report Thread (by Moderators Aug 1 2006 in Non Aviation) Official Sympathy For Israel Thread (by Moderators Aug 1 2006 in Non Aviation) Official Sympathy For Lebanon Thread (by Moderators Aug 1 2006 in Non Aviation)
Please use moderators@airliners.net to contact us.
 
User avatar
Braybuddy
Posts: 5852
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 8:14 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Thu Aug 10, 2006 6:49 pm

Five years into the "War on Terror" Israel are killing Lebanese civilians in their hundreds; Hizbollah are stronger than ever in Lebanon and are lauching missiles at Israel at a rate they can only have dreamt of; Iraq is ungovernable and there is a de facto civil war in place; the Taliban are resurgent in Afghanistan as the war there is about to enter its sixth year; Iran's president calls for Israel to be "wiped off the map" and is on the brink of acquiring nuclear weapons. There have been a couple of hundred people murdered in Madrid, London and Turkey; and today there was a very real risk of airliners being blown-up over the Atlantic.

I thought the whole idea behind this war was to make the world a safer place?

[Edited 2006-08-10 11:52:13]
 
Thorben
Posts: 2713
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2005 10:29 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Thu Aug 10, 2006 7:03 pm

Quoting Braybuddy (Reply 1):

I think the problem in this "war" is that it creates more and more enemies. For example in Lebanon, all this news and pictures of killed and wounded civilians, children etc. will only stir up hatred towards Israel and the West among Muslims. And of course I ask myself, is the abduction of two soldiers proportionate to the killing of hundreds of civilians?

In Iraq it is the same. All the killings and torture by the "liberators" has been so counter-productive. It brings more and more recruits to the insurgents. In the long run the foreign troops will be bombed out, because support at home for their mission will not be big enough. Then Iraq will be no better off than under Saddam and be a real threat to the world.

Afghanistan seems pretty lost as well. There is no political solution for it. The Taleban seem to have many human reserves and there are not enough Western troops there to stabilize the country.

Sorry for the pessimistic outlook, but that's the way I see it. I think the real answer to terrorism is not in bombs and bullets but rather in political fairness. Few people turn into terrorists as long as they have a fair political participation.
France 1789; Eastern Germany 1989; Tunisia 2011; Egypt 2011
 
aloges
Posts: 14842
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 3:38 am

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Threa

Thu Aug 10, 2006 8:39 pm

I just noticed this magazine cover, pissed me off:



the pictures: an orthodox Jew praying, a tank firing, young female Israeli soldiers in uniforms (1960s maybe), the wall between Israel and the Westbank, the Dome of the Rock and the Israeli flag
The subtitles are "What makes the country this aggressive" and "The history of the State of the Jews".

As for the first one, "aggressive"? The entire country? If they hadn't been attacked time and again by their lovely neighbours, some of which (such as Egypt & Jordan) have now officially come to terms with Israel's very existance, there'd be no need for any "aggression" at all.
Second: It probably sounds alright in English, but in my book "Judenstaat" ("Jewish State") in German sounds highly derogatory... I've long held "Stern" magazine in low regard, but this pretty much settles it - borderline anti-semitism at the very least.
Don't cry because it's over, smile because it happened.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6669
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Thu Aug 10, 2006 8:39 pm

My view is that war is big business. Big for those who sell the weapons, big business for those who get contracts to monitor the peace, big business for those who get contracts to rebuild, big for everything / one involved in war.

In this conflict, lets debate the reason why the Lebanese, Hezbollah, Arab League and the French would support a plan to put 15,000 Lebanese soldiers on the southern border with the existing UNIFIL force?

Every supporter of Lebanon, every neutral observer, every expert I have seen on BBC, every reporter, every Lebanese Govt. official, every Israeli supporter, every Israeli Govt. official, French Govt., US, UN all of them have been universal on the following two points:

1. The Lebanese Army does not have the military power to disarm Hezbollah
2. The Lebanese do not want a civil war by attempting to disarm Hezbollah.

Is the giving of the Sheba Farms to Lebanon the magic pill that will suddenly transform Hezbollah into a group that will accept a Jewish State on its border? The number of prisoners Lebanon and Israel claim are in Israeli jails are not high, at least not Lebanese prisoners, so that can't be it either. What exactly is Lebanon attempting to do, certainely, they have convinced the Arab League and the French of the viability of their plan, I would be interested in knowing what it is.

Based on what has taken place so far, when Hezbollah launches a resistance attack in support of its Palestinian brothers, do they believe that Israel will not respond because the Lebanese Army and UNIFIL are on the border? UNIFIL already had Hezbollah fighters in close proximity to its post and they were bombed, ditto the Lebanese Army, they have been hit as well.

To my knowledge, the US has not supported placing US troops in the proposed international force, so do the Lebanese Govt. fear foreign peace keepers on their soil more than a potential civil war? That seems like a stretch, so the end result will probably be that instead of just Israeli and Hezbollah fighters being killed, the Lebanese Army will join them?

This first amendment to the initial draft has me totally confused, as well as the French acceptance of the initial draft which they knew had no hope of being accepted. I cannot say what would have happened, but if a more reasonable initial draft had been proposed, a ceasefire might be closer now rather than further away. As to a post in the last thread where the issue was raised about the suffering taking place, now we need to include the French, US and UN negotiators, as their bone-head initial draft has resulted in another couple weeks of fighting. War is big business, is this what they all wanted?
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Thu Aug 10, 2006 9:19 pm

Quoting Par13del (Reply 4):
now we need to include the French, US and UN negotiators, as their bone-head initial draft has resulted in another couple weeks of fighting.

I suspect that the first draft was agreed with the Israelis only, Par13del, and then presented to the Lebanese as a sort of fait accompli. Full marks to the Lebanese for insisting on changes; can't have been an easy thing to do, to delay things when your country is being ground to powder around you, day by day.

Oddly enough, I think the pressure is on the Israelis now. They either agree to reasonable terms (especially a timetable for their own withdrawal) or they have to stay in Lebanon themselves, for months or even years, losing military people every day and with rockets still coming over.

The French are in a very strong position, because they are the only 'politically-correct' people around with a big un-committed conscript army on tap. The United States, Britain, and Commonwealth countries like Australia and Canada only have small peacetime armies, and those are already fully-committed in other places, particularly Afghanistan and Iraq.

So the choice for Israel looks like being either to accept a largely-French UN Force on French terms which give the Lebanese a fair shake, or face a situation where 'there ain't gonna be no UN Force', and the Israeli Army has to stay in Lebanon longterm. Getting shot at 24 hours a day.
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
frequentflyer
Posts: 708
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 3:22 am

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Thu Aug 10, 2006 9:40 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 5):
So the choice for Israel looks like being either to accept a largely-French UN Force on French terms which give the Lebanese a fair shake, or face a situation where 'there ain't gonna be no UN Force', and the Israeli Army has to stay in Lebanon longterm. Getting shot at 24 hours a day.

Well a largely-French contingent on French terms would also give Israel a fair shake I think. There is opportunity to be seen as a regional pacifier, something the French are never allergic to.

But if the whole thing is skewed towards benefitting more one side or the other, it will be, one more time a failure.

The need is pacification, removing the terrorist threat, arming and organizing a professional Lebanese army in charge of protecting Lebanon.

I also think that the border should get a DMZ for a while, as in Korea, as long as those guys, Israelis and Lebanese, do not make progress towards being able to live side by side.

This from a usually optimistic guy (!)
Take off and live
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6669
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Thu Aug 10, 2006 11:38 pm

So fare I have not seen any French commitment to put a force in Lebanon, I would be really surprized if they did, their last foray in Bosnia under quasi UN control was a disaster, re the safe zones incidents.
I really dont believe the French want to loose their polictical capital by having some of their soldiers killed in Lebanon by Hezbollah or Israel.
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Fri Aug 11, 2006 12:56 am

Quoting Braybuddy (Reply 1):
I thought the whole idea behind this war was to make the world a safer place?

Pretty good summary of the "progress", state of play, wonder what W calls it. Only things you missed were that Libya has changed some ways, ETA was won over by Spanish Govt negotiations and the Sinhalese extremists managed to set the Tamil extremists off again.

In Afghanistan, Iraq and Lebanon no attempt was made to negotiate. (No I am not going to answer 73 posts saying the Arabs never want to negotiate). It is clear that the major changes in terrorist threats have been achieved by negotiation. It may also be the case that there would be fewer like the UK suspects, if countries such as the UK had been less focussed on war and had paid more attention to the concerns of the communities from which they came.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 5):
The French are in a very strong position, because they are the only 'politically-correct' people around with a big un-committed conscript army on tap. The United States, Britain, and Commonwealth countries like Australia and Canada only have small peacetime armies, and those are already fully-committed in other places, particularly Afghanistan and Iraq.

The US, the UK and Aus would simply be regarded as handy targets by at least one side. The Israeli disposal of UN posts would not be much of an encouragement either.

It is worth noting that an Irish captain (that is Irish Rep so not linking to the UK) interviewed the other night on Aus TV commented (memory here but the percentage is clear) that of about 100 casualties the UN force had suffered, 50% had been caused by non-Israelis and the other 50% had been caused by the Israelis. That does not augur well for the chances of any UN force put in to keep the peace.

I cannot quite decide whether the Israelis did not care about the UN or specifically were sending a message to armies that might volunteer to serve in Lebanon. Either way, it seems extremely short sighted.

Quoting Par13del (Reply 7):
So fare I have not seen any French commitment to put a force in Lebanon, I would be really surprised if they did, their last foray in Bosnia under quasi UN control was a disaster, re the safe zones incidents.
I really dont believe the French want to loose their political capital by having some of their soldiers killed in Lebanon by Hezbollah or Israel.

The French forces were attacked the last time and it would be surprising if they have forgotten it. Certainly the US has not forgotten it was attacked.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6669
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Fri Aug 11, 2006 3:04 am

Baroque I think one thing that the UN has not been firm enough about as an "impartial" broker is to stand on it's principle's.

The Canadian UN observer who was killed at the UN post, sent e-mail's - which have been made public - describing their situation, I would love to see the official e-mails to his boss, would he have specifically mentioned that Hezbollah was inflitrating their post?

The majority of the UNIFIL Force are deployed in Lebanon, so naturally, their "conditions" can be influenced by Hezbollah, how much are these forces mandated to "accept or allow" in order to carry on their duties, and are these duties then compromised in any way by "undue" influence?

In addition to the bombing, there is also more "bad blood" between Israel and the UN, a past kidnapping of Israeli soldiers was performed either using UN vehicles or UN identification, see the Har Dov kidnappings of 2000. That in no way means that the UN aided the event, but it would give the Israeli's pause when considering how much protection they will receive from UN forces.
 
qr332
Posts: 2592
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 11:16 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Fri Aug 11, 2006 7:36 am

Quoting Par13del (Reply 9):
In addition to the bombing, there is also more "bad blood" between Israel and the UN, a past kidnapping of Israeli soldiers was performed either using UN vehicles or UN identification, see the Har Dov kidnappings of 2000. That in no way means that the UN aided the event, but it would give the Israeli's pause when considering how much protection they will receive from UN forces.

Speaking of bad blood between Israel and the UN, see the Qana shelling on 1996, which hit a UN refugee camp and killed over a hundred civilians. The problem is, 10 years ago Israel used the exact same excuse - "Hezbollah fired at us from there", and people still buy it.

This is my post from the other thread, it is the last post and I have to share the link, which links to an article that I found to be superb:

I was just looking at pictures which were seriously painful in Lebanon, and I still can't come to terms to how easily people are willing to dismiss such a large civilian death toll while at the same time people went insane about 9/11 and the London bombings. Why is it that Arabs, whether in Palestine, Lebanon or Iraq can be dismissed as collatoral damage while Westerners can't? Why is it that you peopel have so much sympathy for Israel while at the same time Israel is killing civilians in the hundreds? I don't understand why Americans and supporters of this war can't at least look at it from a human or moral point of view instead of a political one - what if it was your child, your mother, your sister, your friend, or whatever kiled? Americans had a huge amount of sympathy for their own during 9/11, why can't they have the same kind of sympathy for Lebanese civilians who have done nothing to deserve to be killed in this way.

For all pro-Israeli members, I know you will not change your opinions, but open up your eyes a bit to the suffering of others:
http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2006/07/18_gaza.shtml

Does it make sense to you that 1.5 million in Gaza suffer for one soldier and 4 million in Lebanon for two?


Excuse the bad english, i've been awake for 27 hours and only got 3 hours of sleep in the afternoon; i'm jet lagged like crazy.
"The greatest threat to knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."
 
LO231
Posts: 2227
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2004 5:55 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Fri Aug 11, 2006 7:43 am

Quoting QR332 (Reply 10):
The problem is, 10 years ago Israel used the exact same excuse - "Hezbollah fired at us from there", and people still buy it.

I don't. I've lost my respect to the Israeli's, sorry, just an opinion.

Regards,
LO231

Edit: I meant to say: government end their deeds, not the people of Israel, who suffer as well.

[Edited 2006-08-11 00:45:00]
Got both LO 788 frames already, next LO E95 and 734 BRU-WAW-BRU
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6669
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Fri Aug 11, 2006 10:02 am

QR332 I don't think that as far as rulers are concerned, there are any innocents on either side.

The UN is seen as a un-baised broker, unfortunately, it has had incidents which are not favourably to its cause. The current draft seems to only want Lebanese and UNIFIL troops deployed in the south, the Israeli issues with the UN pale in significance to the Lebanese. Based on the numbers of Lebanese civilians who have been hurt in and around UN camps without the UN doing anything to protect them, I would think that they more than the Israelis would not want the UN.

The UN is not going away, no one wants that, the world has to work harder to make it work. Lebanon has the option to have an international peace keeping force with "teeth" to protect them from Israeli aggression, rather than a UN force who will be essentially a watchman. The issue with this I think is that if a international force is deployed, Hezbollah will essentially be removed from the armed conflict on the southern border. If they are not disarmed, is there some fear in Lebanon that they will use their arms to take over the current govt?
 
martinairyyz
Posts: 1188
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2003 6:42 am

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Fri Aug 11, 2006 10:46 am

For this recent plane plot, and many wars, I blame Israel fully. They attacked Lebanon and now it is ruined (I thought they were against such destruction like WW2??) which incited the Arabs and they wanted revenge because USA doesn't stop Isreael becuase they have many ties (especially GWB).


How in hell can people have the slightest light to support a country that does this to another, and claims it aiming precisely? Total disgust at such a cannibalistic destruction. I'm not one to hope for bads but it would be fair if the same destruction happened on both sides for sure.










Chelsea Football Club supporter.
 
Pulkovokiwi
Posts: 627
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 3:17 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:00 am

Quoting MartinairYYZ (Reply 13):

Blaming Israel for this latest plot to down aircraft is absurd. These nutters want to destroy western civilisation and commerce. It has NOTHING to do with the Lebanon situation.
I thought I was wrong but I was only joking!
 
dtwclipper
Posts: 6668
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 3:17 am

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:09 am

Quoting Pulkovokiwi (Reply 14):
Blaming Israel for this latest plot to down aircraft is absurd. These nutters want to destroy western civilisation and commerce.

Oh good lord, can it be that I am in agreement with you?

signed just for you.....

"yet another uninformed Yank"
Compare New York Air, the Airline that works for your Business
 
Pulkovokiwi
Posts: 627
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 3:17 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:23 am

Quoting Dtwclipper (Reply 15):

We are in agreement break out the Tattinger.  Smile
I thought I was wrong but I was only joking!
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:41 am

Quoting Pulkovokiwi (Reply 14):
These nutters want to destroy western civilisation and commerce

I think it's time to look very carefully at the question of how far things done for one reason can have an effect in a totally-different direction. The London Tube bombings, and now this airliner thing, show that somehow or other young people entirely brought up in Britain can be persuaded willingly to embark on suicide missions aimed at killing large numbers of civilians.

In effect, someone 'taught them to hate.' Taught them to believe that 'the West' was determined to make war on all Muslims everywhere, and therefore that all Westerners deserved to die. And, despite the fact that the (highly-efficient) British police have caught a few of them, the process of indoctrinating the young will be continuing.

In any teaching role, 'visual aids' are essential nowadays. I'm quite certain that photographs and newsreel shots of the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq are used to indoctrinate these kids, and that material from the Lebanon (like the dreadful pictures linked to by MartinXYZ) will already be in use as well.

[Edited 2006-08-11 04:43:34]
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
Pulkovokiwi
Posts: 627
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 3:17 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:50 am

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 17):

True and we can only be thankful that someone has talked . Sad that Britain has (in most cases) given them a far greater standard of living than their homeland but they are intent on reeking havoc. I am sure these creeps when not being indoctrinated go to western films,buy western clothing and music and milk the British social security system. One of them apparently is a 20 yr old mother with a 6 month old baby. Good old MI5!!!
I thought I was wrong but I was only joking!
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Fri Aug 11, 2006 12:22 pm

You'd expect an Anglo-Australian to bring cricket into any discussion at some stage, Pulkovkiwi.  

Sajid Mahmoud was born in Lancashire and is an England fast bowler. A couple of days ago he played the major part in defeating Pakistan in a Test Match at Headingley in Yorkshire - taking 4 wickets for 22 runs, a world-class performance by any standards. Every time he went down to the boundary to field he was abused as a 'traitor' by the 'Pakistani' supporters (most of whom were probably as English as he was):-

"England paceman Sajid Mahmood said he refused to let abuse from sections of the Headingley crowd get him down.

"During England's Test victory over Pakistan on Tuesday he was targeted by some fans who accused him of betraying his Pakistani heritage.

"I heard them calling me a traitor during my second spell, but I didn't let it affect me," said Lancashire's Bolton-born fast bowler.

"After taking one of his wickets Mahmood, whose cousin is boxing sensation Amir Khan, cupped his hand to his ear in response to the abuse he was receiving.

"They gave me a lot of chat down on the boundary and then I got that wicket and did that to see what they had to say then," he said.

"Every time I went down to that corner there were a couple clapping and there were a few hurling abuse, so I didn't know what to do.

"They didn't really shut up even after I got a couple of wickets, they just kept going."


http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/cricket/england/4775149.stm

Back in the 1950s the British commander in Malaya, General Templer, coined the phrase 'hearts and minds':-

"General Sir Gerald Templer was appointed High Commissioner and Director of Operations Malaya in 1952 at the height of the insurgency against the British authorities. The "Hearts and Minds" policies were based on those set in motion by military predecessors, but enhanced and strengthened by Templer. When asked if he had sufficient troops General Templer responded by saying emphatically that he had, adding that "The answer lies not in pouring more soldiers into the jungle but rests in the hearts and minds of the Malayan people."

Invading people and bombing shit out of them isn't going to help. We are up against the task of winning back 'hearts and minds.'

If I were 'in charge' of the situation in Lebanon, I would pull the Israeli Army out tomorrow and put in an international force consisting mainly of medics to set up field hospitals, engineers to build temporary bridges, and helicopters to distribute relief supplies.

And I'd ALSO send lots of photographers and TV crews to record their efforts.......  

[Edited 2006-08-11 05:26:59]
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
Pulkovokiwi
Posts: 627
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 3:17 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Fri Aug 11, 2006 12:26 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 19):

True mate true! If they don't like it in the UK send them packing!
I thought I was wrong but I was only joking!
 
cedars747
Posts: 2584
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 8:04 am

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Fri Aug 11, 2006 2:39 pm

Guys please believe me all,Israel want the Litani river,destroy the Lebanese economy and plant terror in the Middle East.Israel cannot survive in a world full of peace and prosperity and their history is a good example.They feel superior to others and hallucinate with the promised land.By the way ,many Jews are against the existence of the state of Israel.In 1968 Israel bombarded the airport of Beirut and destroyed MEA airplanes I wonder where was Hezbollah than
Alex!!!
Tengo una pasion por la aviacion !لدي شغف للطيران !I have a passion for aviation !Jeg har en lidenskap for luftfart!j'ai
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Fri Aug 11, 2006 3:42 pm

Quoting Par13del (Reply 12):
The UN is not going away, no one wants that, the world has to work harder to make it work.

Well Israel is doing its best to make sure it is of as little help as possible. I can see the weaknesses in the UN, but it is a heck of a lot better than nothing, and nothing seems to be what Israel and the destructive side of US politics want. And that is really strange because was there ever an organization controlled as much by a rump as the UN, and I mean the US rump, not the ones that the US usually points its finger at.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 19):
"General Sir Gerald Templer was appointed High Commissioner and Director of Operations Malaya in 1952 at the height of the insurgency against the British authorities. The "Hearts and Minds" policies were based on those set in motion by military predecessors, but enhanced and strengthened by Templer.

He should be #43s patron saint, but I wonder if 43 has heard of him or Malaya.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 19):
If I were 'in charge' of the situation in Lebanon, I would pull the Israeli Army out tomorrow and put in an international force consisting mainly of medics to set up field hospitals, engineers to build temporary bridges, and helicopters to distribute relief supplies.

I think you just got yourself elected Nav20! Careful, you could get elevated to Nav25 if not careful.
 
EurostarVA
Posts: 1205
Joined: Thu May 16, 2002 12:24 am

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Fri Aug 11, 2006 9:22 pm

Quoting Pulkovokiwi (Reply 14):
These nutters want to destroy western civilisation and commerce. It has NOTHING to do with the Lebanon situation.

What a sad and naive outlook, with no analysis, no questioning, and simplification of the issues in this world.

Snap out of your dreams and start questioning the question: WHY?

Bush would have you believe it's because "they hate freedom and the West.

The truth is, it's Bush's "conquest" of the East and evangelical support of Israel that's triggering all this hatred.

It's funny how some people turn a blind eye or simply don't care for the deaths of hundreds and total obliteration of urban areas simply because "they deserve it for standing up with Hezbollah".
If there is a will, there is a way
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6669
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Fri Aug 11, 2006 10:59 pm

Baroque Reply 22
"And that is really strange because was there ever an organization controlled as much by a rump as the UN, and I mean the US rump, not the ones that the US usually points its finger at."

In the early years of the UN that was probably true, but as mentioned in the previous version of this thread, the US has used its veto power more than any other of the permanent members, question is why?

My view of the UN in the last few years has been that it is becoming a entity unto itself, where it now attempts to steer its members rather than the other way around.
 
dtwclipper
Posts: 6668
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 3:17 am

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:11 pm

Quoting Cedars747 (Reply 21):
Israel cannot survive in a world full of peace and prosperity and their history is a good example.

Because they have been attacked since 1948? I think it is the other way around.

Quoting Cedars747 (Reply 21):
They feel superior to others and hallucinate with the promised land

Come on Ceders, you can do better then that!

Quoting Cedars747 (Reply 21):
By the way ,many Jews are against the existence of the state of Israel.

That must be a typo, it should read, "a few Jews in the orthodox community".

Quoting Cedars747 (Reply 21):
In 1968 Israel bombarded the airport of Beirut and destroyed MEA airplanes

Why? Did you bother to explain that?

Quoting Cedars747 (Reply 21):
Israel want the Litani river,destroy the Lebanese economy and plant terror in the Middle East.

BS again!
Compare New York Air, the Airline that works for your Business
 
qr332
Posts: 2592
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 11:16 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:20 pm

Quoting Pulkovokiwi (Reply 14):
Blaming Israel for this latest plot to down aircraft is absurd. These nutters want to destroy western civilisation and commerce. It has NOTHING to do with the Lebanon situation.

That is a naive statement... while it is not the direct cause, events like this are exactly why terrorism exists today - Lebanon, Palestine, Chechneya, Iraq, etc all fuel the hatred of these people and lead to more and more events such as this... these people are obviously not jelous of the West, as the latest events prove (the people were all British-born), and they do this because of what they see as the West being oppressive. All of what has happened in the last century proves to them (and all Arabs, for that matter) that no matter what happens, the world does not care - these people are acting on these thoughts and taking it to the very extreme.

But, I have one thing to say to Americans - if any terrorist bombings/attacks occur, never, and I mean never tell us that we did not show you sympathy after you not only do not condemn, but support the killing of a thousand civilians +. From a human perspective, I have always condemned the 9/11 bombings, but from an Arabic perspective, why should I care about a people who doesn't care about whether my fellow countreymen get killed in the thousands, and simply look at it as collatoral damage?

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 17):
The London Tube bombings, and now this airliner thing, show that somehow or other young people entirely brought up in Britain can be persuaded willingly to embark on suicide missions aimed at killing large numbers of civilians.

And they can be persuaded due to thing such as this, which makes them feel the entire West are viable targets, especially since the West isn't even doing anything to stop it.
"The greatest threat to knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:26 pm

Quoting Cedars747 (Reply 21):
Guys please believe me all,Israel want the Litani river,destroy the Lebanese economy and plant terror in the Middle East.

We'll probably both get flamed for it, Cedars747, but I think the Litani, at least, was indeed one of the objectives. There's no doubt that Israel is rapidly running out of water. I also think that Omlert was assured by the military of the time (the guys he's just fired) that a 'quick clean campaign' was militarily feasible.

However, I think he's now been told by the new lot that, given the unexpectedly-effective resistance put up by Hezbollah, it is now only 'feasible' at a very heavy cost in casualties. And that even if they DO get control of the Litani, defending their gains will be difficult, and maintaining security at a level which would allow the sort of major engineering works necessary to divert the water to Israel will be downright impossible.

Which leaves me wondering what Omlert will do next. Must admit that I personally can't think of anything he can do from here that will not involve a massive 'loss of face.' But my opinion doesn't matter; the real trouble is, even HE doesn't seem to have any idea what to do next either.
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:41 pm

Quoting EurostarVA (Reply 23):
Bush would have you believe it's because "they hate freedom and the West.

I watched Bush rabbit on about "terrrrists" opposing freedom and wondered if he actually believes this or thinks freedom, like cheap gas, is something especially reserved for the US and the rest can go rot in Guantanamo. He just does not have a clue that a huge swathe of the world sees the west as oppressors in a way no longer matched even by Africa.

Quoting QR332 (Reply 26):
Quoting Pulkovokiwi (Reply 14):
Blaming Israel for this latest plot to down aircraft is absurd. These nutters want to destroy western civilisation and commerce. It has NOTHING to do with the Lebanon situation.

That is a naive statement... while it is not the direct cause, events like this are exactly why terrorism exists today - Lebanon, Palestine, Chechneya, Iraq, etc all fuel the hatred of these people and lead to more and more events such as this... these people are obviously not jealous of the West, as the latest events prove (the people were all British-born), and they do this because of what they see as the West being oppressive.

Normally I agree with Pkk, but I am with QR332 on this. Of course Lebanon has fed into it, but clearly from the timing it was planned well in advance of the Lebanon debacle. It is the string of problems that is the cause. And it is also the reason why any apparent addition no longer needs to pass any strict relevance tests. If Islamic populations are on the receiving end then they will get widespread sympathy - whether their case is strong or not. And there is no point in blaming the Islamic world for that, we have been so consistent they don't need to worry about reasons.
 
cedars747
Posts: 2584
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 8:04 am

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Sat Aug 12, 2006 12:00 am

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 27):
We'll probably both get flamed for it, Cedars747

I prefer to be flamed but say the truth in the memory of the kids died in this terrorist attack on Lebanese civilians

Quoting Dtwclipper (Reply 25):
Because they have been attacked since 1948? I think it is the other way around.



Quoting Dtwclipper (Reply 25):
Come on Ceders, you can do better then that!



Quoting Dtwclipper (Reply 25):
That must be a typo, it should read, "a few Jews in the orthodox community".



Quoting Dtwclipper (Reply 25):
Why? Did you bother to explain that?



Quoting Dtwclipper (Reply 25):
BS again!

You are not surprising me ! many people and specially Americans know little about the real face of Israel.You are saying what they told you ,and i am saying what i have experienced in life
Alex!!!
Tengo una pasion por la aviacion !لدي شغف للطيران !I have a passion for aviation !Jeg har en lidenskap for luftfart!j'ai
 
DLPMMM
Posts: 2118
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 12:34 am

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Sat Aug 12, 2006 3:32 am

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 19):
If I were 'in charge' of the situation in Lebanon, I would pull the Israeli Army out tomorrow and put in an international force consisting mainly of medics to set up field hospitals, engineers to build temporary bridges, and helicopters to distribute relief supplies.

And I'd ALSO send lots of photographers and TV crews to record their efforts.......

While all good and noble, what would you do when the aid workers, photographers, and TV crews you sent in are kidnapped and killed?

Your policy sounds alot like GWB's in Iraq, except you don't have anyone to keep civil authority.
 
qr332
Posts: 2592
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 11:16 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Sat Aug 12, 2006 8:22 am

Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 30):
While all good and noble, what would you do when the aid workers, photographers, and TV crews you sent in are kidnapped and killed?

I dare you to find me ONE that has been kidnapped/killed by Israel. The only aid or UN workers killed were by Israel, Hezbollah has never harmed anyone but the Israelis and the Americans.
"The greatest threat to knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Sat Aug 12, 2006 10:22 am

Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 30):
While all good and noble, what would you do when the aid workers, photographers, and TV crews you sent in are kidnapped and killed?

First of all, DLPMMM, I was talking about sending in soldiers, not civilians. Although my strategy would involve a high proportion of specialists, they would be well able to look after themselves.

But secondly, and more important, why do you and others automatically assume that the entire civilian population of any occupied area consists solely of kidnappers/killers? It simply DOESN'T, anywhere in the world. Properly-trained armies, like Commonwealth ones, fully understand the importance of 'hearts and minds' techniques and start putting them into practice as soon as they arrive in any area.

Taking Iraq as an example, have you ever wondered why the casualty rate of the coalition forces occupying the southern half of Iraq (mostly British, but with others as well, including Australians) is less than 1/10th. of that being suffered by US forces? That isn't accidental - it's simply because they are better prepared and trained for occupation tasks than the US Army and the Marine Corps.

[Edited 2006-08-12 03:50:46]
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
dl021
Posts: 10836
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:04 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Sat Aug 12, 2006 12:33 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 32):
Taking Iraq as an example, have you ever wondered why the casualty rate of the coalition forces occupying the southern half of Iraq (mostly British, but with others as well, including Australians) is less than 1/10th. of that being suffered by US forces? That isn't accidental - it's simply because they are better prepared and trained for occupation tasks than the US Army and the Marine Corps.

Dude, I did not even read much else. You are so offbase here it's unreal. The US forces occupy the most violence prone Sunni sections of the country deliberately so that it's coalition partners will feel the least pressure from casualties. Your comment is akin to pointing out that the Schaumberg police department have lower casualty rates than the Gary PD because the Schaumberg PD is better trained. No, it's because Gary is a much more violent and murder prone neighborhood.
Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Sat Aug 12, 2006 1:13 pm

Quoting DL021 (Reply 33):
The US forces occupy the most violence prone Sunni sections of the country

Straight 'chicken and egg' question there, DL021. The other way of looking at it is to ask yourself WHY the sections of Iraq occupied by US forces are 'the most violence-prone'? Besides, the Australian Army, as one example, has had troops in Baghdad from the beginning, and so far the only fatal casualty (still under investigation) seems to have been an SIW.
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
Pulkovokiwi
Posts: 627
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 3:17 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Sat Aug 12, 2006 1:16 pm

Quoting DL021 (Reply 33):

How is he offbase when he presents factual information?????
I thought I was wrong but I was only joking!
 
 
AA777
Posts: 2358
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 7:07 am

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Sat Aug 12, 2006 3:43 pm

Quoting FXramper (Reply 36):

So Israel has accepted the cease-fire deal. Its too bad the details of the UN draft have been so quietly kept. Lebanon rejected it because it would allow Israel to keep troops inside their borders... NOW I'm interested if this has been changed at all. If not, I wont be surprised if Lebanon rejects it again....or at least calls for more revisions. If they fully reject the proposal, which I dont think they would...I hear the voices of all the people who say "oh those arabs never want peace." Not true, we want peace- we just dont want to be screwed over in the process of trying to attain it. Then again, enough damage has been done.....what are a few thousand Israeli troops added to the mix?  sarcastic 

-AA777
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Sat Aug 12, 2006 4:04 pm

Full text here, AA777. An optimist would say that it calls for a complete Israeli withdrawal; a pessimist would say it allows Israel lots of room to 'wriggle'.......

"1. Calls for a full cessation of hostilities based upon, in particular, the immediate cessation by Hizbullah of all attacks and the immediate cessation by Israel of all offensive military operations;

"2. Upon full cessation of hostilities, calls upon the government of Lebanon and UNIFIL (The UN Interim Force in Lebanon) as authorized by paragraph 11 to deploy their forces together throughout the south and calls upon the government of Israel, as that deployment begins, to withdraw all of its forces from southern Lebanon in parallel;"


http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3289950,00.html

The 'good news' is that our radio says that the powers-that-be in Israel intend to lose no time in getting rid of Omlert, whose popularity is already below 50% in the opinion polls. Maybe they'll choose someone with brains this time?
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
edka
Posts: 371
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 5:15 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Sat Aug 12, 2006 8:49 pm

Quoting Cedars747 (Reply 21):
Guys please believe me all,Israel want the Litani river,destroy the Lebanese economy and plant terror in the Middle East.Israel cannot survive in a world full of peace and prosperity and their history is a good example.They feel superior to others and hallucinate with the promised land.By the way ,many Jews are against the existence of the state of Israel.

What Israel wants is to live in peace and be left alone - its up to its Arab neighbours to accept it or reject it. Your comments above show why it is almost impossible... Plain and simple...

Quoting EurostarVA (Reply 23):
Snap out of your dreams and start questioning the question: WHY?

Good question. WHY?? it is always much easier to blame someone else, than looking into the real issue. The Islamic fundamentalsim today represents far bigger problem that any extremist view from ANY OTHER religion. So why don't you snap out of your dreams and face the issue.

Quoting QR332 (Reply 26):

But, I have one thing to say to Americans - if any terrorist bombings/attacks occur, never, and I mean never tell us that we did not show you sympathy after you not only do not condemn, but support the killing of a thousand civilians +. From a human perspective, I have always condemned the 9/11 bombings, but from an Arabic perspective, why should I care about a people who doesn't care about whether my fellow countreymen get killed in the thousands, and simply look at it as collatoral damage?

So, from an Arabic perspective, you saying that US deserved it? That you don't care about 9/11?
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6669
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Sat Aug 12, 2006 9:18 pm

So far the only difference that I have seen with the current resolution versus what existed before July 12th is the inclusion of Lebanon in the Sheba Farms debate, remember that 1559 had resolved that should be negotiated between Israel - the occupying power - and Syria from who the territory was taken.

Essentially, we are back to the status quo that existed before all this started, Hezbollah still has their two soldiers, Israel is still holding Lebanese prisoners, Gaza and the West Bank are not included, the Lebanese Army may be going south, the previous resolution calling for Hezbollah to disarm is up in the air, the existing UNIFIL mandate has not changed only their numbers.

At the end of the day what has happened:
Israel lost troops, civilians, damaged infrastructure

Hezbollah may or may not have lost territory.

Lebanon lost troops, civilians, infrastructure, possible gained the Sheba Farms.

International community may have stopped the fighting in the short term, gets to provide humanitarian aid, gets contracts to rebuild Lebanon, wealthy Arab nations, the US and others possibly get to foot the bill.

The cynic in me says that those outside of the region now have what they want, a supposed end to the violence on a mass scale, my hope is that when violence resumes on a small scale that they will show the same degree of caring and compassion.
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Sat Aug 12, 2006 9:50 pm

Quoting EDKA (Reply 39):
So, from an Arabic perspective, you saying that US deserved it? That you don't care about 9/11?

I cannot in any way speak for QR332 but what comes to my mind from what was written is that most Arab countries did have considerable sympathy with the US after September 11 2001. It appears he is saying that since then the actions of a number of countries especially the troika of the coalition of the willing has done their best to lose hearts and minds to the point where the self centred attitudes of those countries (and yes, that includes Australia) has caused at the very least a reappraisal.

Quoting Par13del (Reply 40):

The cynic in me says that those outside of the region now have what they want, a supposed end to the violence on a mass scale, my hope is that when violence resumes on a small scale that they will show the same degree of caring and compassion.

The cynic in me demands to know why the idiots concerned did not start to negotiate the day before all this happened. You cannot tell me that BOTH sides would not have been better off.

Nav20 certainly observes facts about the distribution of trouble. It may be that the central triangle was inherently more difficult. But once the US decided to take a role in administering that area, pretty much from day one we saw US troops "saying Hi to the neighbours" by kicking down the doors. We don't know why in most cases. But we do know that was preceded by a short period of doing nothing when Rummy assured us all that "democracy was always a little messy". So there are reasons to suggest that US policy has not been well adjusted to gaining acceptance and the maintenance of law and order.
 
qr332
Posts: 2592
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 11:16 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Sat Aug 12, 2006 10:09 pm

Quoting EDKA (Reply 39):
What Israel wants is to live in peace and be left alone - its up to its Arab neighbours to accept it or reject it. Your comments above show why it is almost impossible... Plain and simple...

How can Israel expect to live in peace as long as it continues to do what it does? If Israel wants to live in peace, why is it occupying three territories that aren't their's, attacking another country and killing large numbers of civilians, and being completley aggressive - not to mention not even considering those millions of refugees it wass responsible for creating in 1948. For a country that wants to live in peace, it sure pisses off a lot of people and acts very aggressivley. Israel knows exactly what it has to do if it wants to live in peace, yet it has never done it, and has continued to piss off every single Arab in the region. This is not the way countries live in peace.

Quoting EDKA (Reply 39):
So, from an Arabic perspective, you saying that US deserved it? That you don't care about 9/11?

No, as a person who has immense respect for the population of the US and what the country stands for, and as a human, I could never say the US deserve it - what I am saying is it is amazing how much double standards exist. People keep claiming Arabs don't care about 9/11, but do you know that even Hamas and Hezbollah condemned the attacks?

What I am saying, is that from an Arab perspective, you expect us to care when you yourselves dismiss 1,000 deaths as collatoral damage. Why is it we are expected to raise hell when something happens in the US while at the same time you guys don't even condemn it?! Yet, despite all these inequalities, Arabs still condemned 9/11 and showed a lot of sympathy. Why can't we, as Arabs, dismiss such events as collatoral damage of attacks on Iraq, Lebanon, Palestine while you can?
"The greatest threat to knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."
 
edka
Posts: 371
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 5:15 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Sat Aug 12, 2006 10:31 pm

Quoting AA777 (Reply 37):
So Israel has accepted the cease-fire deal. Its too bad the details of the UN draft have been so quietly kept. Lebanon rejected it because it would allow Israel to keep troops inside their borders... NOW I'm interested if this has been changed at all. If not, I wont be surprised if Lebanon rejects it again....or at least calls for more revisions. If they fully reject the proposal, which I dont think they would...I hear the voices of all the people who say "oh those arabs never want peace." Not true, we want peace- we just dont want to be screwed over in the process of trying to attain it. Then again, enough damage has been done.....what are a few thousand Israeli troops added to the mix?

AA777 - I also want peace. I also don't want to be screwed over by some militia terrorist group or its powerfull sponsor. I want Israel and Arab countries to leave in peace in the Middle East, if not friends then at least have a mutual respect for each other and not attack/provoke each other (unfortunately, the way things are going i believe less and less that this will be possible).

So you want peace, i want peace, at least we are in agreement on that?

Now my question is, what do you do with Hezbollah? It is clear that they have been preparing for this confrontation, have financial and ideological support from Iran and have no intention of putting down their weapons. I don't think they will ever drop their hostile attitude towards Israel - not if they want to continue to be financed by Iran, so where does that leaves peace?
 
dtwclipper
Posts: 6668
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 3:17 am

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Sat Aug 12, 2006 10:32 pm

Quoting QR332 (Reply 42):
Israel knows exactly what it has to do if it wants to live in peace

What exactly would that be? Cease to exist?
Compare New York Air, the Airline that works for your Business
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Sat Aug 12, 2006 10:42 pm

Quoting Baroque (Reply 41):
It may be that the central triangle was inherently more difficult.

I always think that the 'sacking' (excuse the old-fashioned word, I'm an old-fashioned bloke) of Fallujah was the turning-point, Baroque. Don't know about you, but I was transfixed with horror watching it. I honestly believe that if you'd asked any Commonwealth troops to carry out an operation like that even the 'hard cases' would have refused pointblank; and their officers would have resigned rather than give the orders, anyway.
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
cairo
Posts: 889
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 2:41 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Sat Aug 12, 2006 10:46 pm

Quoting MartinairYYZ (Reply 13):
For this recent plane plot, and many wars, I blame Israel fully. .

Israel is to blame if you consider their magical creation at the end of World War II incorrect. The Arabs and Muslims never accepted it as correct*, while the European countries who were trying to get rid of unwanted homeless Jews did.

This whole conflict boils down to whether you think Israel's creation was right or wrong. All the violence since then has simply been battles in a war between the sides who think Israel's creation was right and those who think it was wrong.

Quoting Pulkovokiwi (Reply 14):
These nutters want to destroy western civilisation and commerce.

No, quite wrong. 'Western' civilisation is not under attack, America is. American policies** in the ME generate terrorism against America, nothing else.

The Islamic terrorists do not attack western nations like Germany and Canada because they stay out of the ME, these nations are concerned with their own countries. Only those nations killing Arabs and Muslims in the ME everyday, namely America and Israel, are the target of Islamic terrorism.

Suggesting Muslims hate or are jealous of American/Western culture or freedom or capitalism, and that this causes terrorism, is nothing but mental masturbation.

Quoting Dtwclipper (Reply 25):
Because they have been attacked since 1948? I think it is the other way around.

Of course you think it is the other way around, because you one-sidedly support Israel in all that they do - namely kill children and unarmed civilians in numbers many times as great as any Islamic terrorism.

Why not just consider that the Israelis and Arab/Muslims are arguing over the same piece of real estate and that no side is 100% right or wrong, considering that Israel was created only 58 years ago from land previously called Palestine or the [Arab] Ottoman Empire?

Quoting EDKA (Reply 39):
What Israel wants is to live in peace and be left alone - its up to its Arab neighbours to accept it or reject it.

I think it is clear many have rejected it. They don't agree with Israel's formation, and quite frankly, putting Israel in the one place in the world where it is guaranteed to be hated and attacked by all of its neighbors, was, in hindsight, one of the monumentally stupidist things we have ever done. This is the long tentacles of WW2 still affecting peace today.

Quoting EDKA (Reply 39):
od question. WHY?? it is always much easier to blame someone else, than looking into the real issue. The Islamic fundamentalsim today represents far bigger problem that any extremist view from ANY OTHER religion

No, Israeli attempts to make this a war against an entire religion, in Israel's never-ending campaign to bribe and control US policy is the threat to peace. The Arabs and Muslims want their own religion in their own region - who is the odd one in the ME, the Arabs and Muslims or the Israelis?

Quoting EDKA (Reply 39):
So, from an Arabic perspective, you saying that US deserved it? That you don't care about 9/11

The US didn't deserve 9/11 or any kind of terrorism, but US policy in the ME was the primary ideological reason why 9/11 occurred. Take a look at the average terrorist***: they are engineers, well educated and smart. They are angry at policies, not lifestyles.

Changing policy must be a part of any war on terrorism, fighting terrorism with terrorism, Israeli-style, only creates more terrorism.

Cairo


* Following World War II, the British withdrew from their mandate of Palestine, and the UN partitioned the area into Arab and Jewish states, an arrangement rejected by the Arabs
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/is.html

** http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/1129/dailyUpdate.html

*** http://www.discover.com/issues/jul-06/cover/

[Edited 2006-08-12 15:47:50]
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Sat Aug 12, 2006 10:59 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 45):
I always think that the 'sacking' (excuse the old-fashioned word, I'm an old-fashioned bloke) of Fallujah was the turning-point, Baroque. Don't know about you, but I was transfixed with horror watching it. I honestly believe that if you'd asked any Commonwealth troops to carry out an operation like that even the 'hard cases' would have refused pointblank; and their officers would have resigned rather than give the orders, anyway.

You might well be correct there, although I have the feeling that it had gone before that event (although there have been at least two and maybe three or more battles of Fallujah). I guess we will finally understand it better when a series is made in the style of the World at War series. I doubt if the doco makers will wait as long this time, so we can hold our breath.

To be fair too, we don't know the details of what they were supposed to do, but from this distance, they did seem to spend a fair bit of time bombing outposts that might have been taken by small arms. The availability of precision weapons may have turned out to be a disadvantage when it comes to the overall effect.

But it does seem clear that either the US army needs to completely change its ways or ensure that it never ever gets into that sort of situation again. It has been a disaster for the army and one can only begin to imagine what it must be like for the Iraqis on the receiving end - and most of them are probably not trying to fight anyone.

As for the Brits, let us await the verdict of history. It looks better, but again we don't know all that much.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6669
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Sat Aug 12, 2006 11:02 pm

Cairo Reply 46
"Why not just consider that the Israelis and Arab/Muslims are arguing over the same piece of real estate and that no side is 100% right or wrong, considering that Israel was created only 58 years ago from land previously called Palestine or the [Arab] Ottoman Empire?"

"I think it is clear many have rejected it. They don't agree with Israel's formation, and quite frankly, putting Israel in the one place in the world where it is guaranteed to be hated and attacked by all of its neighbors, was, in hindsight, one of the monumentally stupidist things we have ever done. This is the long tentacles of WW2 still affecting peace today."

Cairo both are correct, I would only add that Jews as a people were also a part of the Middle East.

The question is what should be done about the current situation that exist on 12th August 2006 ( my time ).
 
edka
Posts: 371
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 5:15 pm

RE: Official Middle East Conflict Discussion Thread 4

Sat Aug 12, 2006 11:27 pm

Quoting QR332 (Reply 42):
How can Israel expect to live in peace as long as it continues to do what it does? If Israel wants to live in peace, why is it occupying three territories that aren't their's, attacking another country and killing large numbers of civilians, and being completley aggressive - not to mention not even considering those millions of refugees it wass responsible for creating in 1948. For a country that wants to live in peace, it sure pisses off a lot of people and acts very aggressivley. Israel knows exactly what it has to do if it wants to live in peace, yet it has never done it, and has continued to piss off every single Arab in the region. This is not the way countries live in peace.

Take one step at the time, ok? You are mxing several thing together here (Palestinians and the others), and you know full well that even though they are connected, they are separate issues here and should be dealt with separately.
This specific conflict, right now, Israel did not want it, and Israel didn't start it.

Quoting QR332 (Reply 42):
What I am saying, is that from an Arab perspective, you expect us to care when you yourselves dismiss 1,000 deaths as collatoral damage. Why is it we are expected to raise hell when something happens in the US while at the same time you guys don't even condemn it?! Yet, despite all these inequalities, Arabs still condemned 9/11 and showed a lot of sympathy. Why can't we, as Arabs, dismiss such events as collatoral damage of attacks on Iraq, Lebanon, Palestine while you can?

first of all, how can any Arab treat 9/11 as a collateral damage?? No Arab country was at war with the US when it happened. 9/11 was a pure terrorist attack, and the people who executed it were not Palestinians or Iraqis. They were moslty Saudis, and they did it becuase of the ideological beliefs. there is a big difference, seriously do you not see the difference??

I don't dismiss civilians deaths personally, I felt really bad when the Qana bombing happened, but QR this is a war which Israel did not start. This is the war that Israel does not seem to gain any advantage because Israel does and try to minimise civilians casualties, at unusually high cost to itself and the IDF. This is the war when Israel will go and accept ceasifire knowing that this will only delay the issue, not solve the problem.
I may be hard for you to believe but Israel does not want to kill civilians...Show me one Hezbollah soldier who gives a fuck about Israelis? I mean they are killing Israeli Arabs as they go along - they don't give a fuck and will not stop. This is what the difference is.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: LittleFokker, tommy1808 and 20 guests