Avram Horowitz wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 6:30pm:


The reply is out of proportion and on the wrong people though. Israeli authorities know this.

The settlements shouldn't be there @ all. Helping ppl by asking the settlers nicely isnt really help is it.

SOB

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 6:30pm:


This is problem. You ask for it.

You can not stand in front of progress.

What is the objective of the Palestinian 'resistance'?

What will satisfy them?

The elimination of Israel.

That's it? No compromise?

No, that's it. No compromise.

What form  would that elimination take?

....

Well, then I say, Israel is showing admirable restraint - like a democratic, civilised country. It is facing barabrians who will not rest until it is eliminated. With the history of pogroms and the holocaust, I think the Jews are fantastically patient and humane.

I have zero doubt that if it was the other way around, with a tiny Islamic country in the sea of infidels ho are threatening it every day the Islamic entity would have unleashed hell a long time ago. Islamic history demonstrates that.



What would you numpties do if you were responsible for 6. million Jews in Israel? Cave in and be wiped out?? 
Remember, Jews love life, Islamists love death. What would you do as an Israeli Prime Minister?

Soren wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 7:49pm:


@ this point in time their objective is to live in peace without israeli interference. Israel has broken every ceasefire that I know of. Prolly most of them. Maybe all.

Israel is being unreasonable expecting them to lay down and die or something. Building settlements on their land. Treating them like cattle. Killing them willy nilly. Destroying their farms and their roads and their wells.

Just stop it. Stop it. Let them have west bank and gaza WITHOUT unreasonably demanding you leave settlements there and military. STICK to a peacefire.

A the very least.

SOB

PS was it you that called them things?

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 6:02pm:


These 'mobile units' are what Australians call utes. You don't need a squadron of f16's to take out a ute. As I suggester an Apache helicopter could hop over the wall and take out a ute in half a minute.

If you read what I said with your blinkers off, you'd see I make a good point. It's not that people here don't understand conflict in Israel or anywhere else. It's that they see the consistancy of Israels disproportionate responses.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 8:54pm:


Are you going to elaborate on that?

SOB

Whether the HAMAS org. is a result of 'blowback' or came into being as an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood is a moot question since it certainly came into existence as a result of Israeli actions that pushed the radicalisation of the Palestinian people.

Despite Soren's efforts top stop and start history where it is convenient to support his spurious arguments; it is clear from the earliest Zionist writings that the intent was to drive Palestinians from their land and create a Jewish theocratic state in the ME.

Quote:


Whether yo7u agree or not the evidence is there that Apache helicopters can easily destroy utes and that Israeli actions are disproportionate. In fact in the months before 2008's 'cast lead' offensive against Gaza City HAMAS had been acting to stop radical militants associated with FATAH from firing rockets.

Quote:


And so it can clearly be seen that the attack on Gaza was not to stop rocket attacks, but to stop them stopping.

Every Israeli action has been disproportionate. Let's take Lebanon for example. In 1982 Abu Nidal's 'Black September' org. tried to assassinate Israel's UK ambassador. And so Israel launched a war against all of Lebanon.

As a result of Israel's policy of not allowing war refugees to return to their homes Lebanon was already effectively two states North and South. What was the aim of this mad reprisal that plunged Lebanon into chaos and civil war? To warn that Israel wouldn't tolerate its diplomats being threatened? It's like the United States launching a blitzkreig against Poland after the assassination of McKinley.

And when Lebanon finally started to rebuild after decades of instability. To the extent that the media were reporting Lebanons economic miracle, and reporting the return of Beiruit to its position as the Paris of the Middle East. Blow me down with a feather Israel does the same thing all over again. What exactly it hoped to achieve defys logic.

It claimed it was to force the Beiruit government to attack Hezbullah. Well it was pretty obvious that Lebanon would've been delighted to be in a position of regaining its control over all of its territory. It's obvious that a government with a strong economy can do that sort of thing. It was equally obvious that after years of being a basket case Lebanon had other priorities and a war against Hezbullah would only cripple it again.

So what was Israels aim? Why did it straffe columns of refugees heading North? Why did it bomb Beiruit itself? You'd think Israel would want a strong and secure neghbour that could afford to deal with its problems like the disposessed former occupants of Palestine. Why would Israel possibly think that a failed state is a better neighbour?

The only answer is to be found in America. The Capitalists of the USA are utterly paranoid about a successful socialist altrernative. They've run a programme of destabalisation against South America from year dot. Result - 'blowback'.