War Has Been Declared, choose your side.

In the states, we call them the ACLU. Sadly, they havent been involving themselves in war issues.

Laugh out loud funny. You have al jazeera in your sig. Why would I take seriously anything you say about Israel?

If by that you mean rolling over and playing dead, you're right. They won't do that anymore.

No, more along the lines of wanton unnecessary death. I'd think that as a whole, they would find such anathema. Whether it's happening to them, or anyone else.

Wanton and unnecessary? No. If their neighbors would quit it with the "we're going to push you into the sea" and "we will destroy you" and "let's bomb your seder" bullshit, I could pretty much guarantee you that Israel wouldn't be doing what it's doing today. What you want is for Israel to take the abuse and not utter a peep and not defend itself.

No, I don't want anything of the sort. I just don't want them to be as bad as their neighbors, as they've had experience to teach them that that kind of thing is wrong.

No. The 1973 Arab oil embargo was responsible for that.

P2

So, your solution is what? Form a circle and sing "Kumbaya" and hope they come around?

To reiterate from a related thread:

/112/89/117107/1.html#post1117285

P2

Michael Seraph, Lorelei Patel, thankyou for attempting to stuff your strawmen in my mouth. Kinda shows your hand, too. And do try to cool it on the Ad-Hominems. They're bad form. Sorry, but I won't be singing from your 'whack-a-raghead' songsheet either.

Well pointed out, Orpheum Apogee. I feel the Israelis would do well to explore their common roots with their neighbours.

As an aside I find the Israeli hypocrisy regarding the Iranian program to build a nuclear power plant stunningly unsurprising. Israel is armed to the teeth with nuclear weaponry and yet cries wolf when a distant country attempts to build itself a nuclear power station using what is pretty much obsolete technology.

As regards 'T3h Palestinian Ishoo', it's always easier to shoot fish in a barrel than building bridges, eh? But building bridges is what they'll have to do one of these days.

And do feel free to join me in further discussion on this topic at Guardian Unlimited Talk, an excellent forum for political and current-affairs discussion and debate.

Pot kettle black zing

Yea, that one! WTH- I was 4 at the time. All I remember is Israel, someone got pissed off at us, then BOOM!!! Gas Rationing!

But hey, it made for some good episodes of CHiPs

I'm not proposing a solution. I wouldn't dream of proposing a solution to people who were subject to someone else's final solution. I'm merely asserting that they should always try to be better than those who would seek to undo them.

Nice words, but how do they do that without getting themselves killed? Nice words won't do much to save them. They need solutions. So, until you see a better way, maybe cut them some slack.

So now it's my responsibility to solve all their problems? No, it isn't. It never was and it never will be. I'm only pointing out that their current approach will not solve their problems anymore then they themselves were 'solved'.

I didn't say it was your job. I was hoping you'd gain a sense of perspective. You know, if you were in their shoes kind of thing.

Your kidding right? You don't see the difference between Israel having nukes and Iran having them? There is a huge difference.

Israel has made it clear that their nuclear weapons (which the US gave them by the way) are solely for defensive purposes and would only be used in retaliation to an attack on Israel with WMD.

The leader of Iran has publicly stated, on more than one occasion, that Iran is committed to "wiping Israel off the map". The official stated national policy of Iran is the total destruction of Israel.

I would say that is a pretty good reason to not want Iran to obtain nuclear weapons, and frankly I think Israel can and should do whatever it takes to prevent Iran from getting said weapons. Just as any other nation would do in similar circumstances.

You did indicate that it was my job to come up with a better solution or to cut them slack. It is also not my job to cut them slack.



I think I have a pretty decent perspective on it. Thus far, killing each other has not solved either anyone's problems with Israel (or previous to Israel, people of that faith) or vice versa. Are you asserting that killing people is an appropriate solution to a disagreement? Or only a certain perceived level of disagreement? And that I should cut people slack for employing such a solution until I can solve their problems?

Isn't Iran the one with the declared war on Isreal? I know it was one of the Arab nations in the Middle East.

oh and I still resent your comment about the Marine's a few posts back

If I remember correctly Isreal has been invaded 3 times by 3 different countries in less than 75 years. They did nothing to instigate these wars, yet they still get invaded. I think there is a point when diplomacy stops and asskicking begins

There's also a point where asskicking stops and diplomacy begins. Changing someone's mind at the point of a gun works, but obviously not long enough to solve the original problem in this case. As 3 invasions in 75 years should really indicate to some of these people.

It wasn't meant as a bad comment my friend. It was a "don't mess with the Marines cause they will fuck you up" kind of statement really.

I think war should be avoided if at all possible. But, if someone just won't let you avoid it no matter how hard you try, then the doctrine of overwhelming force is the only one that makes sense. If they absolutely want a war with you, then give them one. No half measures.

If they push you into an armed conflict, then you annihilate them as quickly and as efficiently as possible.

Something which the Marines are pretty good at.

Semper Fi

I am saying that defense is entirely appropriate. And your point of view is entirely unreasonable.

How were we pushed into conflict again?