SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - Is this the beginning...

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)

- General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)

- - Is this the beginning... (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=95807)

I would suggest Israel uses it's nukes before the "use by" date runs out. :lol: By the way...I'd use 'em just to see how pretty they are. ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

Quote:

Originally Posted by scandium

How does bombing the Lebanese airport get back Israel's kidnapped soldiers, and is the overwhelming use of Israeli military power as used in the bombing and invasion of the war torn fledging democracy that is Lebanon a proportional response to the actions of a handful of Lebanese guerillas?

Oooh, the poor warn-torn fledgling democracy - controlled by Syria and Iran. Oooooooh I'm gonna cry! Boo hoo! :oops:

Okay, then if they were controlled by Syria and Iran then where is the Iranian and Syrian response? Nowhere to be seen because Lebanon is an independent democracy while both Syria and Iran are neither. That isn't to say Lebanon doesn't have strong political and economic ties with its neighbours - but what country doesn't? That doesn't equate "control".

Quote:

Who said anything about proportional, the stupidest leftist word on the Internet at the moment. Oh, was that a barb? Sorry.

When did "proportional" become the domain of the left? Back in the 60s we had our problem with a terrorism organization based out of Quebec called the FLQ, whose agenda was, through militant action, the overthrow of the Quebec government and the seperation of Quebec from Canadian Confederation. From 1963 to 1970 the FLQ committed over 200 acts of violence including bombings, bank robberies, and killings. In October of 1970 they separately kidnapped 2 prominent politicians who they would release only if outrageous demands were met. One week after the second kidnapping the 2nd hostage was killed, and the location of his body was divulged by the kidnappers.

Two months later police discovered the location of the kidnappers who were holding the first hostage, who was still alive, and his release was negotiated. As a condition of the hostages release, we granted safe passage for 5 of the terrorists to Cuba, after obtaining permission from Fidel Castro. Over time various other terrorists associated with crimes committed by the FLQ were caught, tried, convicted, and imprisoned. And that was the end of the FLQ as the events of the October Crisis, combined with the apprehension/deportation of its most prominent members eroded any sympathy for their cause or efforts to recruit new members.

I bring this up to illustrate the concept of proportionality and why it is important; during the October Crisis the Canadian government's actions accomplished the release of the surviving hostage and removed the perpetrators/ring leaders from our society but in a manner that did not create support for the FLQ - in fact, its moderation in the face of their extremism was a factor in the FLQ's demise. Would the movement have died though if we had responded by arbitrarily rounding up random Quebecers and shooting them in Town's Square, proclaiming we would continue to do so until our hostages were released? Of course not, aside from being morally abominable it would have only stirred up outrage in Quebec and played right into the FLQ's hands. We would never have gotten the hostage back and only incited the FLQ to commit worse crimes and for more people to flock to their ranks.

By the way, are you familiar with the 1942 assassination of Reinhard Heydrich bya pair of Czech nationals and the events that followed? At any rate, Heydrich was the administrator of occupied Bavaria and Moravia and his assassination did not go over well with Hitler who instructed the SS and Gestapo to wade through blood to find the killers, and wade through blood they did. The village of Lidice was one casualty of the collective punishment meted out by his underlings, who completedly destroyed the village and murdered its 340 men, women, and children. But then being fascists, what little use would they have for leftest concepts handed out on the internet like "proportionality"? I mean the internet didn't even exist back then. Curiously enough though Stalin, who is as extreme on the left as you go, didn't seem to have much use for proportionality either, as he sent millions off to die in the Gulags for such crimes as political or religious dissent. But then the internet didn't exist back then either, so we can excuse his behaviour since proportionality would have been a foreign concept to people back then. But I digress.

Quote:

I understand that aiports are sometimes used by military forces. But that's just lil' ol' me doing some fancy thinking there.

What airforce? And it was a civilian airport by the way.

Quote:

And look at all the hypocrites. US? Russia? We don't come near their massive and non-specific attacks when they deem them necesary (Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya)

You won't find an apologist for Russia's overseas adventures or America's war in Iraq, and I agree that they are hypocrits. But this thread isn't about Iraq or Afghanistan, and you are now engaging in the very same relativist thinking that you and Skybird are forever accusing me off. The only thing I'll say on that is that the American firebombing of Dresden was no defence for those tried at Nuremburg.

Quote:

When you invent the magic weapon that can identify innocent Canadians, call us. We'll be happy to use it.

They might not have been there if you hadn't first bombed the Lebanese International Airport - but who needs civilian Airports anyway? Aside from non-existant Air Forces.

Quote:

Civilized democratic countries don't have parties in Parliament calling for the annihilation of their neighboring country, provided with sophisticated weaponry from rogue regimes including Iran, Syria and North Korea and jump into other countries to kill soldier, and civilians and kidnap them for ransom, too.

Allow me to break this run-on sentence down point by point:

#1 is a red herring. Israel occupied Lebanon for 22 years and Hezobollah formed for the very purpose of fighting the IDF that was occupying Lebanon. And if we go back to the time of the British Mandate, your own history isn't so clean when Israeli militant factions were attacking the British in what was then Palestine while the British were busy fighting the Nazis in Europe - and this was before Israel formally even existed. Sure Israel is no longer occupying Lebanon now, but is it realistic to expect that every militant in the country would simply pack up their weapons and take up farming only 6 years after the IDF has left, and forgetting all of the anger and resentment that a 22 year occupation would fuel? Not really. Further, this party occupies only 11% of Parliment so they are hardly representative of the Lebanese government, let alone the entire nation of Lebanon. Then there is the whole freedom of speech thing, and the fact that it even extends to members of parliment for whom rhetoric is part of the job description.

#2 As to the weapons arguement, that is another red herring. Rockets are not terribly sophisticated, and the U.S. sells arms that really are sophisticated to such progressive nations as Saudi Arabia, while democracies like Russia and France do extensive business with both Syria and Iran so what impossible standard are you trying to hold Lebanon to?

#3 Again, an act by guerillas for which any case has been made that their actions were ordered, or even on behalf, of the Lebanese government. I mentioned the FLQ, which at one point in their existance - before the plot was discovered - had planned to blow up the Statue of Liberty. Fortunately this did not happen because I like France, the US, NY, and the Statue of Liberty. But suppose the FLQ had succeeded - what do you think the appropriate US response would have been? Certainly a lot of Americans would have been justifiably pissed off, but would they have been justified to bomb and invade Canada? No, nor would they have (I have enough respect for my American neighbours to give them the benefit of the doubt).

Quote:

Thank G-d normal people do not want to live in your lunatic world.

Okay. Odd that you say this because in my "lunatic world" I can walk the street, any street in this city, at any hour of the day or night, and unarmed always, without worrying that I will be killed or mugged or blown up or even hasseled by police, and where no walls exist, no checkpoints exist, and no 2nd class of citizens to be feared exists. If this is a "lunatic world" that I live in then I don't want to know what your definition of a sane one is, though I strongly believe the actions your government is taking right now in Lebanon will not help matters much for you. Quite the contrary, in fact.

Quote:

Is Al Qaeda an accepted party of Canada's government, given support, sanctuary and weapons by Canada? Just let us know.

The FLQ never gained accepted party status, its militant nature having been defeated by reasonable, rational measures, but the part of their ideology - that which sought seperation from Canada - lives on, in a peaceful spirit, within one of our 4 major national parties and within its sister provincial party in Quebec. Both parties are not only accepted, but have considerable political power as well both provincially in Quebec and to a lesser extent federally. Things could have turned out very differently, of course, and I have no doubt that had we dealt with the FLQ the way you folks deal with things over there then the FLQ would still exist and Canada would resemble a very different place today. Not that I'm not sympathetic to your situation, only that I am turned off by your methods.

Quote:

Indeed we will. We reaped yesterday what was sown in Israel's retreat from S. Lebanon 6 years ago. Thanks for the lesson!

From the retreat, or from the 22 year long occupation?

errr...Scandium...I didn't read all your post, but AV says "Israel bombed the Lebanese airport because they were using it for it's military forces"...and you answer "What airforce?". :lol:

See this is all pub talk...cos if it was serious...you'd have people wetting themselves from laughter.

You do realise you can pack militia into an Airbus 330? Or planes carrying weapons from Iran can land and arm terrorists that way?

If I was heading Israel, I'd take Gazza (back), Palestine, Lebanon and Syria...then I'd sue for peace through the UN. Why not? It's a good idea!!! :arrgh!: Then in a year I'd take Iran. :up:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kurushio

What's your point Kurushio? The U.S. captured the Iraqi airport and ports within a matter of weeks, if not days, and then captured Baghdad and occupied the country with a 180,000 strong force within 6 weeks, and how's that working out as far as militias, terrorists, and weapons goes? Do yourself a favour, turn on the news and listen to Rumsfeld go on about the "foreign terrorists" swarming in over the Syrian border (and who knows from where else, but certainly not from the airport) and then look at a map and notice that Syria also borders Lebanon. Then ask yourself if you need an international airport to bring in supplies that can more easily be driven across the border.

Bombing their international airport served no military purpose whatsoever. Period. Lebanon, after decades of civil war and occupation has been finally beginning to achieve the very stability, democracy, and some small measure of prosperity and human rights that the U.S. claimed it was intent on bringing to Iraq and now thanks to a handful of extremists and the Israel and its IDF, this could all be for naught. And what does the US, which pretends to be so concerned about democracy in the ME say or do about it? Why it unconditially supports Israel of course.

"Democracries don't go to war with each other." -- G.W. Bush

There will never be peace when nations like Iran and Syria fund terrorist organisations. There will also never be peace when nations like Iran and Syria make it official policy to wipe Israel off the map. I think we should let Israel use it's nukes and army, and see how far it goes. If it was the other way around, they'd have done it already. Just nuke the bastards, invade their land and be done with it....then finally we can have some peace. Problem solved.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5193228.stm.

"Negotiate with Hezbollah." - Some never learn, even after years of attempts that failed and fired back - at the cost of Israel.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kurushio

I think we should let Israel use it's nukes and army, and see how far it goes. If it was the other way around, they'd have done it already. Just nuke the bastards, invade their land and be done with it....then finally we can have some peace. Problem solved.

Sorry, just curious but......do you really feel what you wrote?

sorry... i've attempted to stay out of this so far, but i also would like to know if your were serious about that as well...

also, is karusio a japanese name, word, or whatever...

--Mike

This is from Djihadwatch, but before anyone thinks he must put it down becasue of that, the quoted articles - as so often - have diffrent primary sources: The Washington Post.

Quote:

Richard Cohen: Israel a "mistake"; should retreat to pre-'67 borders, "hunker down," and wait

Richard Cohen's suggested strategy for achieving peace among Israel and its neighbors shows the hazards of basing foreign policy on revisionist history. From the Washington Post (via LGF): "Hunker Down With History", with thanks to Hugh Fitzgerald:

The greatest mistake Israel could make at the moment is to forget that Israel itself is a mistake. It is an honest mistake, a well-intentioned mistake, a mistake for which no one is culpable, but the idea of creating a nation of European Jews in an area of Arab Muslims (and some Christians) has produced a century of warfare and terrorism of the sort we are seeing now. Israel fights Hezbollah in the north and Hamas in the south, but its most formidable enemy is history itself.

This is why the Israeli-Arab war, now transformed into the Israeli-Muslim war (Iran is not an Arab state), persists and widens. It is why the conflict mutates and festers. It is why Israel is now fighting an organization, Hezbollah, that did not exist 30 years ago and why Hezbollah is being supported by a nation, Iran, that was once a tacit ally of Israel's. The underlying, subterranean hatred of the Jewish state in the Islamic world just keeps bubbling to the surface. The leaders of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and some other Arab countries may condemn Hezbollah, but I doubt the proverbial man in their street shares that view.

Never mind the fall of the Shah, and the Islamist takeover of Iran. Put the highlighter down; that's not important.

[...]

There is, though, a point in cautioning Israel to exercise restraint -- not for the sake of its enemies but for itself. Whatever happens, Israel must not use its military might to win back what it has already chosen to lose: the buffer zone in southern Lebanon and the Gaza Strip itself.

[...]

But worse than what is happening now would be a retaking of those territories. That would put Israel smack back to where it was, subjugating a restless, angry population and having the world look on as it committed the inevitable sins of an occupying power. The smart choice is to pull back to defensible -- but hardly impervious -- borders. That includes getting out of most of the West Bank -- and waiting (and hoping) that history will get distracted and move on to something else. This will take some time, and in the meantime terrorism and rocket attacks will continue.

How's that for strategy? Retreat and hope.

The remainder of Cohen's piece proceeds as something of a non sequitur-- a few historical anecdotes, and it ends. Fortunately, Israel Matsav has supplied a thorough rebuttal (see "A History Lesson"; thanks again to LGF and Hugh Fitzgerald):

At Little Green Footballs this morning, Charles Johnson points to an article in today's Washington Post with the comment, "At the Washington Post, Richard Cohen agrees with Hamas and Hizballah that 'Israel is a mistake.' And he’s open to the argument that Israel is a 'crime.'"

If that sounds like an overly blunt characterization of what Cohen wrote in this morning's Washington Post, it's not. Cohen's article reflects a total ignorance of Jewish history, and of the Jewish connection to the land of Israel dating back to biblical times, which is inexcusable even for an assimilated Jew (which I assume Cohen to be). In fact, even Christians should be offended by Cohen's writing them out of the history of the Holy Land. Cohen adopts the Arab narrative of the last century of history lock, stock and barrel, without even considering that it might be false. Note, I said Arab and not 'Palestinian,' because the 'Palestinians' by their own admission are a fiction created by that Arab narrative.

The term "Palestina" was invented by the Roman emperor Hadrian. The Romans wanted to rename Eretz Yisrael (the Land of Israel) after the Philistines, the longtime enemy of the Jews. Hadrian believed that by renaming the Jewish homeland after the Jews' archenemy, he would be able to forever break the bond between the Land of Israel and the Jewish people.

[...]

The rest of Cohen's argument is standard leftist drivel about how Israel has to 'hunker down' and allow itself to be beaten rather than decisively winning a war (and that's what we're in now) and being able to find peace on its own terms. The fact that Israel has tried to 'hunker down' and give away its territory time and time again in a bid to make 'peace' with the 'Palestinians' - and that the 'Palestinians' and their Arab supporters have come back to fight another day each time - shows the fecklessness of that policy. It's very simple: the Arabs will not willingly tolerate any Jewish presence in this part of the world. There is no amount of land that we can give them that will entice them to live in peace with us. Until we decisively defeat them, they will come back to fight another day and another day. There is no need to give any more of an answer than that.

Israel is neither a mistake nor a crime. It is the beginning of the culmination of more than 2000 years of Jewish yearning to return to our homeland. The manner in which the Jewish people has chosen to govern the Land of Israel has its faults. But being a 'mistake' created in 'Arab land' - let alone being a 'crime' - is not among those faults. We Jews have to learn to stop listening to liberals like Cohen and to start fighting - with God's help - for our existence. Hopefully, the current battle marks a turning point.

Read it all, especially the superb set of quotations of primary sources.
Posted at July 18, 2006 05:52 PM

A year or longer ago I myself questioned the wisdom and justice of having founded Israel in the way it has been done in1948, and nthat it was the most stupid places to do that. but i also said that neervtheless today I recognize the right to exist, on the basis of one argument: time. One could question the existence of Israel, if the founding ofd it would have been just 5 years ago. But after 60 years, two generations already have been born - and died - in it and for it. Questioning Israel today would repeat the very same injustice that took place in 48 and would mean that one has not learned anything from that. So now that it is there since that long, the only choice is to make the best of it. I may have doubts about it's longterm survivability, but these do not come from moral scruples, but simple strategic considerations. Israel does exist at the cost of eternal war, in a very exposed position.

I recommend to use the link to Israel Matzev'S reply, which is quite some interesting history stuff.

No moral scruples eh? An article by Gideon Levy, former spokesman for Shimon Peres:

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/738739.html

Quote:

Operation Peace for the IDF

Every neighborhood has one, a loudmouth bully who shouldn't be provoked into anger. He's insulted? He'll pull out a knife. Spat in the face? He'll draw a gun. Hit? He'll pull out a machine gun. Not that the bully's not right - someone did harm him. But the reaction, what a reaction! It's not that he's not feared, but nobody really appreciates him. The real appreciation is for the strong who don't immediately use their strength. Regrettably, the Israel Defense Forces once again looks like the neighborhood bully. A soldier was abducted in Gaza? All of Gaza will pay. Eight soldiers are killed and two abducted to Lebanon? All of Lebanon will pay. One and only one language is spoken by Israel, the language of force.

The war that the IDF has now declared on Lebanon and before it on Gaza, will never be considered another "war of no choice." Let's save that debate from the historians. This is unequivocally a war of choice. The IDF absorbed two painful blows, which were particularly humiliating, and in their wake went into a war that is all about restoring its lost dignity, which on our side is called "restoring deterrent capabilities." Neither in Lebanon nor certainly in Gaza, can anyone formulate the real goals of the war, so nobody knows for sure what will be considered victory or an achievement. Are we at war in Lebanon? With Hezbollah? Nobody knows for sure. If the goal is to remove Hezbollah from the border, did we try hard enough over the last two years through diplomatic channels? And what's the connection between destroying half of Lebanon and that goal? Everyone agrees that "something must be done." Everyone agrees that a sovereign state cannot remain silent when it is attacked within its own borders, though in Israel's eyes Lebanese sovereignty was always subject to trampling, but why should that non-silence be expressed solely by an immediate and all-out blow?

In Gaza, a soldier is abducted from the army of a state that frequently abducts civilians from their homes and locks them up for years with or without a trial - but only we're allowed to do that. And only we're allowed to bomb civilian population centers.

The painful steps taken in Gaza, which included dropping a one-ton bomb on a residential building, or killing an entire family of seven children under cover of darkness in Lebanon, killing dozens of residents, bombing an airport, cutting off electricity and water to hundreds of thousands of people for months were a response lacking any justification, legitimacy or proportion. What goal did it serve? Was the soldier released? Did the Qassams stop? Was deterrence restored? None of that happened. Only lost honor was supposedly restored, and immediately the next evil wind showed up, this time from the north.

Two more soldiers were abducted and it was clearly proven that the deterrent power was not restored, while IDF failures repeated themselves. How does one erase those searing failures? On the backs of innocent populations. In Lebanon, the situation is more complicated. There is no Israeli occupation and no justification for provoking Israel. If Hezbollah is so worried about its Palestinian brethren, it should have first of all done something for the hundreds of thousands of refugees living in camps in Lebanon in conditions that are just as bad as those under the Israeli occupation, before it grabbed soldiers in their name.

But does the fact that Hezbollah is a cynical organization that exploits the misery of Palestinians for its own purposes justify the disproportionate reaction? The concept that we have totally forgotten is proportionality. While we're in no hurry to get to the negotiating table, we're eager to get to the battlefield and the killing without delay, without taking any time to think. That deepens suspicions that we need a war every few years, with terrifying repetition, even if afterward we end up back in exactly the same position.

The war we declared on Lebanon has already exacted from us, and of course from Lebanon, too, a heavy price. Did anyone give any thought to the question whether it should be paid?

Everyone knows how this war begins, but does anyone know how it ends? Heavy casualties in the Israeli rear? A war with Syria? A general war? Is it all worth it? Look what a new rookie government can do in such a short time.

Behind the operations in Lebanon and Gaza is the same foolish idea about pressure on the population leading to political changes that Israel wants. In the history of the Israeli-Arab conflict, that concept has only led us from one disaster to the next. We "cleansed" southern Lebanon of Palestinians in 1982, and what did we get? Hezbollahstan instead of Fatahland. Hamas won't fall because Gaza is in the dark, and not even because we bombed the Palestinian Foreign Ministry building at the weekend - another nonsensical move; Hezbollah won't be smashed because the international airport in Beirut has been put out of commission.

Israel once again is not distinguishing between a justified war against Hezbollah and an unjust and unwise war against the Lebanese nation. The camouflage concealing the war's real goals was ripped off by this defense minister, who says what he means: "Nasrallah is going to get it so bad that he will never forget the name Amir Peretz," he bragged, like a typical bully. Now at least we know that Israel went to war so that the name Amir Peretz is never forgotten. It's the war for the perpetuation of the name Peretz and the blurring of Dan Halutz's failures. And to hell with the cost.

If a victim of decades of terror starts to hold itself responsible for others trying to murder and annihilate it, then this situation has an unvoluntarily yet strong taste of black humour.

The Palestinians are responsible for Hamas being targetted, for they have brought the Hamas to power.

The Lebanese are not unguilty, too. They have done nothing to protest in the street, to bring public life to a standstill in protest against their government, the corruption, Syrian presence, and the presence of the Hezbollah. they say it is their country, then they should take better care of it. It all takes place in the middle of their community, but nevertheless now they say :"Hezbollah is not in our town, not in our block, it is somehwere out there, but we are not responsible". the old pattern of Islam - accepting terrorists and/or extremists in their middle for hiding, instead of isolating them and driving them out, and then saying "we are not them, we are not responsible for their deeds, they are not us." Fly with the crows, get shot with the crows. In German, we say it even shorter: mitgefangen, mitgehangen - Basta.

If there is one lesson to be learned from this European illusion of "peace process" (in TV they still discuss how the "peace process" can be reawakened - as if it ever has been there) then that it has not acchieved anything, and I am deeply sorry for every tax-Euro from Germany being wasted in this process. Now they want to send UN troops. Great idea. The UN always has failed when it came to "robust mandates". As a matter of fact there are already UN troops stationed, twothousand. Their effect: zero. They write reports, and that's it, they do not influence events in any way, nor do they prevent strikes against Israel. Their political mastermind has ordered them to recognize militias as regular government troops, thus not stopping them when they head for the border to commit new attacks. The UN wants more of this paper-folly, so that it can say: our tools are sufficient to adress the reality, we have the power to make peace. But the reality and what the West thinks is reality are lightyears apart. years of constant terror bombings - that is considered to be a peace process. Those responsible for this murderous plot are considered to be trustworthy negotiation partners. And Jack the Ripper will be declared vice chairman of the International charity fund. Hooray - more of this, please! there is no terror and no murder, these crimes can be effectively fought by not labelling them as this. "Let's show how reasonable we are - let's show how willing we are to let our attackers stay alive, and carry on with shooting at us, and shake their hands at negotiation tables! We have lived with bloodshed for thirty years, so we can be expected to live another thirty years and longer with it." That's what the West demands from Israel. Hypocricy.

As far as the Lebanese are concerned, as a nation and community they obviously have not done enough to prevent what is happening now. Bad choice, accepting terrorists in your backyard is no good idea. Now they are shown the bill. If hitting Hezbollah targets means to destroy civilain taregts as well - then be it: that is war. Never allow your enemy to prevent your from shooting at him. It already is difficult enough to idnetify Hezbollah positions. If the presence of non-targets is another excuse not to fight back, then the IDF is left with niothing more than cooking tea and having a picnic all day long.

80% of Israelis are quoted to be in support to this operation. Maybe the West should start to take note of this number. It is their immediate fates at stake, not ours. and most westerners that now beolieve they must open their mouth and voice their oh so great opinion - never have seen a battlefield with their own eyes, not to mention to have been experiencing war, and lethal violence.

For Iran, all this is a nice distraction from it's nuclear program. Syria cannot afford war with Israel, so it stay silent. Behind the curtain, both countries are pulling the strings in Lebanon.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Sto...823817,00.html

Am I serious? Well let's face it...there's gonna be a world war one day...this way we just get a head start. And yes...there will be another world war...now or in a hundred years...it's only a matter of when :up:

p.s. Obviously i meant use the nukes on military facilities. also...nukes are pretty...I'd wait until dark to launch them...much better lightshow...

ok... let me be the first to suggest that karushio change his handle to Gen Jack Kurushio Ripper...

surely you must be joking... but i must ask... how is your 'essence' doing these days K...
--> http://www.lukefisher.com/women.wav

--Mike

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike 'Red Ocktober' Hense

ok... let me be the first to suggest that karushio change his handle to Gen Jack Harushio Ripper...

--Mike

Did you read the part about nukes being pretty? I like pretty things too...like flowers....and nukes. errr:hmm: yeah....whats the point of building a nuke if you're going to throw it away...at least use it..:yep:

edit: nukes never hurt anyone...